Why is the southern part of South Asia more developed than the northern part of South Asia

[Foot12]

Southern India and Sri Lanka are more developed than Afghanistan, Pakistan, northern India and
Bangladesh in terms of Human development, literacy rate and GDP. But this was not always the case.
From the 4th century BC to the 6th century CE parts of northern India was more developed than southern
India as northern India produced the greatest Dynasties of ancient India like the Maurya Empire and
Gupta Empire. Under Mauryan and Gupta rule northern India was the center of South Asian civilization.
But from the 7th century onwards the northern part of South Asia started to decline and the southern part
of South Asia started to flourish. During the early medieval period southern India became the center of
South Asian civilization and science. Indian mathematics flourished in southern India during the medieval
period and the greatest mathematicians of medieval South Asia were from southern India like Bhaskara II
and Madhava. During the medieval period the greatest Dynasties of South Asia were established in
southern india like the Rashtrakuta Empire, Chola Empire, Western Chalukya Empire, Vijayanagar Empire
and Maratha Empire. The Mughal rule reestablished the glory of northern India for a short period of time
but even the Mughals were defeated and conquered by a power from the south the Maratha Empire.
How can the northern part of South Asia regain its past glory and is there any hope for countries like
Afghanistan and Bangladesh?

 

[Star Wars]

Same thing i have noticed in India as well ..........

 

[Srinivas]

Who said Northern India is more developed in Ancient times??

If you see the history majority of the mathematicians, philosophers and scientific advancements came from South India and Bengal.

Like the mathematical school of Kerala and all.

Delhi is important because it is a power center.

South India is always a wealthy region and also has good agriculture and trade activities through sea.

 

[UKBengali]

There is little difference in actuality.

Two major factors account for the difference:

1. Some of the Northern Indian states are very populous and backyards but not all.

2. BD would be right up there with Sri Lanka if it went indepedent at a similar time to rest of South Asia.

South Asia, bar Sri Lanka, is extremely backyard and let's not pretend some parts are much better than others.

 

[Manvantaratruti]

Ancient North India was as much advanced as south India if not more. UP and Bihar were the pride of India. So was Kashmir & parts of Pakistan.

Much of its fall has to do with REPEATED Islamic invasion and prolonged British Rule (Bengal).

 

[Ajatashatru]

South Asia, bar Sri Lanka, is extremely backyard and let's not pretend some parts are much better than others.

Come to South India and see for yourself. South India is more developed than north in terms of human development. In fact if human development in north was similar to south, India would have been similar to Sri Lanka in terms of human development.

 

[A Town]

There is little difference in actuality.

Two major factors account for the difference:

1. Some of the Northern Indian states are very populous and backyards but not all.

2. BD would be right up there with Sri Lanka if it went indepedent at a similar time to rest of South Asia.

South Asia, bar Sri Lanka, is extremely backyard and let's not pretend some parts are much better than others.

LOL at the second point.
Back on topic, Bengal is never associated with the traditional perception of North India.

 

[jatt+gutts]

Punjab which is in north india has always been best state. southern states like kerala have higher percentage of literate people but aint high in standard of living

 

[jandk]

Punjab which is in north india has always been best state. southern states like kerala have higher percentage of literate people but aint high in standard of living

Punjab has terrible urban infrastructure. Compare Kochi to Amritsar. The only decent city is Chandigarh and that too because it's a union territory and capital of two states.

 

[A Town]

North India is more rural and traditional compared to socially progressive South India.
North Indians, especially the older generation are not welcome to change.

 

[abjktu]

Punjab which is in north india has always been best state. southern states like kerala have higher percentage of literate people but aint high in standard of living

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX
1.Kerala(0.790,high)
......
.....
5.Punjab(0.605 medium)
thank you.

 

[Manvantaratruti]

Punjab has terrible urban infrastructure. Compare Kochi to Amritsar. The only decent city is Chandigarh and that too because it's a union territory and capital of two states.

That is because Punjab is largely rural, kerala is largely urban. In fact Kerala is one huge city

 

[INDIC]

Punjab has terrible urban infrastructure. Compare Kochi to Amritsar. The only decent city is Chandigarh and that too because it's a union territory and capital of two states.

Punjab is all about agriculture and Green revolution.

 

[Sriram]

Southern India and Sri Lanka are more developed than Afghanistan, Pakistan, northern India and
Bangladesh in terms of Human development, literacy rate and GDP. But this was not always the case.
From the 4th century BC to the 6th century CE parts of northern India was more developed than southern
India as northern India produced the greatest Dynasties of ancient India like the Maurya Empire and
Gupta Empire. Under Mauryan and Gupta rule northern India was the center of South Asian civilization.
But from the 7th century onwards the northern part of South Asia started to decline and the southern part
of South Asia started to flourish. During the early medieval period southern India became the center of
South Asian civilization and science. Indian mathematics flourished in southern India during the medieval
period and the greatest mathematicians of medieval South Asia were from southern India like Bhaskara II
and Madhava. During the medieval period the greatest Dynasties of South Asia were established in
southern india like the Rashtrakuta Empire, Chola Empire, Western Chalukya Empire, Vijayanagar Empire
and Maratha Empire. The Mughal rule reestablished the glory of northern India for a short period of time
but even the Mughals were defeated and conquered by a power from the south the Maratha Empire.
How can the northern part of South Asia regain its past glory and is there any hope for countries like
Afghanistan and Bangladesh?

During ancient and medieval times also Southern India was much ahead as far as arts and science was concerned ... If you are going to compare on the geographical size of dynasties alone, Northern India was ahead for some time..

This difference mainly it is due to political stability... North of South Asia never had that political stability that the south enjoyed throughout the recorded history...

 

[jatt+gutts]

Punjab has terrible urban infrastructure. Compare Kochi to Amritsar. The only decent city is Chandigarh and that too because it's a union territory and capital of two states.

have you ever been to Punjab..and Amritsar?