This article sheds light on the tangible influence of India’s maritime history on its geographical development and cultural blossoming, from antiquity to the present. Tracing the distinct histories and spatial trajectories of two major seafaring Indian polities from the past— the Mauryans and the Cholas— this text attempts to reveal a persistent cultural continuum that extended beyond regional borders, which invariably expanded to other continents, predominantly through maritime channels. In doing so, this article highlights key transformative junctures in Indian history (spatially now identifiable as the South Asian subcontinent), each catalysed by maritime connectivity. The core argument of this analysis rests on the strategic culture theory, as it interrogates the nature of expansions undertaken by these dynasties and juxtaposes them with the contemporary DIME framework, an acronym of American origin that is gaining popularity in the world of strategic analysis and commentary.
India’s geography has been profoundly influenced by its maritime history, from the earliest period of the Harappan civilisation to the present day. The nation’s strategic positioning—extending to meet the Arabian Sea, the Bay of Bengal, and the Indian Ocean— has been responsible for fostering the growth of dynamic coastal societies, which prospered due to the widespread and intricate transoceanic trade networks. Over millennia, India has served as the critical nexus of multiple trade routes, giving rise to bustling port cities and commercial hubs. These urban outcrops were vectors of cultural transformation as Indian traders, and eventually imperial powers, began extending their reach beyond familiar lands. While considerable scholarly attention has been devoted to the impact of colonial maritime empires upon their annexation of India, its precolonial maritime linkages remain relatively underexplored. This paper addresses these lacunae through an interdisciplinary analysis examining the manner in which maritime interactions have historically shaped (and reshaped) the Indian subcontinent’s geography and socio-cultural landscape.
In this regard, the exploration of the basic strategic tools— namely, the instruments of national power— employed by the ancient Indian kingdoms warrants serious scholarly attention, particularly in light of their remarkable accomplishments in territorial consolidation, administrative sophistication, and the seemingly undying cultural influence. The Mauryan Empire, particularly in the years building up to and during Ashoka’s reign, serves as an illustrative example, primarily due to the sheer size of territory amassed under the empire’s flag during his reign. The Mauryan Empire under Ashoka, at its zenith, extended over a landmass comparable in scale to that of the present-day European Union—unified![1]
In other words, when the territorial extent of the Mauryan Empire is overlaid onto a modern political map, it becomes quite evident that Emperor Ashoka presided over a landmass comparable in scale to the present-day European Union[2], spanning more than four million square kilometres[3]. Sustained influence over such an expanse not only attests to the logistical and administrative capacities of Mauryan governance but also reflects an exceptional degree of strategic foresight, diplomatic sophistication, and military organisation. This historical milestone reveals the depth and applicability of indigenous political thought and statecraft that underpinned early Indian empires. However, the concern is that despite the availability of these unique intellectual frameworks and strategic legacy, contemporary Indian strategic discourse tends to rely heavily on Western conceptual frameworks—the DIME model being the most obvious example, which classifies national power into four instruments: Diplomacy, Information, Military, and Economics.[4]
Although the DIME model provides a structured and analytically useful framework within the context of the prevalent geopolitical scenario and modern international relations, its indiscriminate and frequently uncritical adoption to assess premodern Indic polities may appear somewhat unsuitable. Blatant reliance on such models may result in the region’s own deeply theorised traditions, exemplified by classical texts such as Kautilya’s “Arthashastra”, being neglected. The Arthashastra stands as an authoritative text that articulated a sophisticated and comprehensive vision of state power, strategic manoeuvring, and pragmatism. There are clear references in the text to a ‘Board of Admiralty’ in Chandragupta’s War Office, and even a mention of several posts related to the Naval Department.[5]
This theoretical discord, therefore, demands a more critical engagement with indigenous frameworks, not necessarily as a rejection of global paradigms, but as an essential step toward reclaiming agency surrounding strategic thought and reasserting intellectual autonomy in the study of power and statecraft.
Furthermore, a compelling, yet still contested, hypothesis explored by some scholars posits the relative antiquity and strategic importance of regions such as Kalinga in comparison to the more prominently documented Mauryan Empire. This line of enquiry proposes that the consolidation of the Mauryan Empire was strategically contingent upon the conquest of Kalinga, reflecting a calculated and sequential approach to territorial expansion to essentially gain access to the ports, thereby controlling trade and naval heft.[6] Chandragupta Maurya’s initial unification of the Magadhan heartland laid the groundwork for imperial expansion, a legacy that was sustained and advanced by his son, Bindusara, as he ventured out into central India and portions of the southern peninsula. By the time Ashoka ascended the throne, nearly six decades of systematic and unabated expansion had forged a vast and cohesive imperial structure. It was against this backdrop, Kalinga— a rising independent regional power— emerged as both a geopolitical obstacle and a strategic target; acquiring Kalinga was perceived as an essential element to fulfilling the Mauryan ambition of pan-subcontinental integration.
The Kalinga region and its people are well-documented in both indigenous and foreign historical sources. Early Greek literary texts, for instance, reference a group known as the ‘Oretes’, widely believed to correspond to the ‘Odras’ of Sanskrit literature.[7] Pliny the Elder, drawing on Megasthenes in his work entitled ‘Natural History’, identified the ‘Oretes’ as inhabitants of the territory surrounding Mount Maleus—an area that classical sources consistently associate with Kalinga.[8] Indian and Greco-Roman sources alike describe Kalinga as a prominent coastal polity, traditionally bounded by the mouth of the Ganges in the north and the estuary of the Godavari in the south.[9] The Mahābhārata contains one of the earliest indigenous references to this region, in the portion which elaborates on an episode in which the sage Lomasa, standing by the Ganges, instructs Yudhishthira on the strategic and spiritual significance of the Kalinga lands.[10] Kalinga’s maritime capabilities were such that the Bay of Bengal was, at one point in time, referred to as the “Kalinga Sea” and its islands known collectively as Kalinga Dresu.
A notable textual reference to this nomenclature appears in the 7th century Mahayana Buddhist work ‘Aryamanjusri Mulakalpa’, which describes the Bay of Bengal (otherwise referred to as Mahodadhi) as Kalinga Sāgara, or the “Kalinga Sea.”[11] In Sanskrit literature, the seafaring Kalingans are often honoured with the epithet Kalingah Sahasikah, meaning “the brave Kalingans,” further attesting to their formidable reputation as maritime adventurers and naval powers.[12] It is crucial to note that the Hathigumpha inscriptions of King Kharavela, dating back to 1st century BCE, indicate that Kalinga was a well-established independent power.[13]
It is also well established that, akin to the ancient Magadhan Empire, Kalinga was also a prosperous region with bustling cities such as Tosali, Kalinganagar, Somapa, Dantapura, and Simhapura.[14] The Utkal Coast, which lined the sea-facing territory of the Kalingan kingdom, was dotted with port sites that were once witness to bustling trans-oceanic commerce. The Greek scholar Ptolemy, in his work ‘Geography of India’, named numerous major ports of Kalinga in different districts such as Nanaigam (present-day Puri district in Odisha), Konagar (present-day Konark in Puri district in Odisha), Kosambi (present-day Balasore district in Odisha), Palur (present-day Ganjam district in Odisha), Kalinganagar (present-day Srikakulam district in Andhra Pradesh), and Tamralipti (present-day Tamluk in Midnapur district of West Bengal).[15]
The Bali Yatra, a tradition observed annually on Kartik Purnima, commemorates the maritime expeditions of Kalingan merchants and mariners to Southeast Asia, particularly to the Indonesian island of Bali.[16] Corresponding ceremonial practices in Southeast Asia— Thailand’s Loy Krathong, for instance—signify a shared cultural memory rooted in early maritime linkages across the Bay of Bengal, reflecting the enduring legacies of premodern Indian Ocean connectivity. These traditions reflect the enduring legacy of Kalingan mercantile networks, which facilitated not only trade but also long-term cultural and religious exchange with local populations in Southeast Asia.
Certain Chinese sources referring to the ‘Kun-Lun’ people are thought by some scholars to denote the Kalingans. This conclusion was based on evidence of early maritime settlements in the northern Malay Peninsula and the island of Java.[17] Another line of interpretation identifies the term ‘Holing’ as the Sinicised equivalent of ‘Kalinga’. Additionally, many draw on epigraphic records and inscriptions from Java, which mention a place named ‘Holing’[18] (often remarked to be under the polity referred to as the ‘Kalingaa Kingdom’[19]). Notably, Queen Shima is remembered as a significant figure under whose reign the Kalingan polity in Java flourished. Some scholars further argue that Kalingan influence persisted into the 8th century CE under the Sailendra dynasty, which ruled central Java and Sri Vijaya, and may have been descended from the Sailodbhava lineage of Odisha.[20]
The earlier hypothesis, in addition to underscoring the maritime imperative behind the Mauryan conquest of Kalinga, effectively pushes back the timeline for the emergence of seafaring polities in the Indian subcontinent. This invites a broader epistemological inquiry into the retroactive application of modern strategic frameworks, such as the DIME model, to premodern societies. On one hand, such conceptual transplantation risks distorting indigenous logics of power by imposing externally derived standards, even when they may be deployed for comparative purposes. This risk becomes particularly magnified when geographic bounds and specificities are taken into account along with civilisational legacies, rendering certain comparisons tenuous or even invalid.
However, to outright reject the utility of cross-cultural frameworks simply on the basis of their origin would undermine the broader intellectual enterprise of comparative analysis altogether. There is abundant evidence of cultural borrowing, normative translation, and strategic emulation in human history; These processes have seldom respected civilisational boundaries. No society has ever existed in a state of epistemic isolation; ideas, technologies, and even institutional models have circulated beyond core territories—sometimes through coercion, but often through dialogue, exchange, and curiosity. When applied for their qualitative value and with contextual sensitivity, external (or “foreign”) frameworks can serve as interrogative tools that enrich rather than constrain analysis. This does not, however, legitimise historical acts of coercive epistemic domination. Generalised statements that seek to soften the legacy of colonialism— for instance, by suggesting that the colonial experience was not “entirely detrimental”— must be approached with critical scrutiny, lest they overshadow the structural violences and epistemic erasures that accompanied imperial rule.
The argument advanced in this paper proposes that such analytical exercises, when executed with methodological care, can help recover and restore voices, patterns, and logics that are often obscured by dominant historiographies and conventional strategic narratives. In this regard, the histories of seafaring Indian polities serve as a reminder that effective strategy— whether ancient or modern— is seldom a linear and domineering instrument to exercise state power; In fact, it is philosophically grounded, culturally encoded, and historically situated.
Recommendations
In sum, the Indian seafaring kingdoms demonstrated a remarkably early comprehension and coherent application of the instruments of power suggested in contemporary strategic studies such as the DIME framework. The following recommendations would prove useful in advancing greater interest in the role of maritime history within Indian strategic culture:
- Facilitate Interdisciplinary Research on Strategic Continuity
Promote cross-disciplinary research initiatives that examine the continuity and evolution of India’s strategic principles—from the Kalinga and the Mauryan periods to the present day. By integrating historical, political, and security studies, such research can yield nuanced insights that inform contemporary maritime and regional security policymaking. - Convene Expert Dialogues and Strategic Workshops
Organise regular Track 2 dialogues and thematic workshops that bring together historians, defence analysts, diplomats, and regional experts. These forums should aim to contextualise India’s enduring strategic culture within current geopolitical challenges, fostering a shared understanding that extends beyond formal diplomatic channels. - Publish Policy Briefs Linking Strategic Heritage to Contemporary Practice
Develop concise, evidence-based policy briefs that draw explicit connections between India’s historical maritime strategies and its current security doctrines. These briefs could be disseminated through think tanks, academic journals, media platforms, and policymaking circles to enhance their reach and impact. - Establish Digital Platforms for Knowledge Exchange
Create dedicated online platforms—such as open-access repositories, interactive databases, and academic forums—where researchers and strategists can share historical records, analytical papers, and contemporary case studies related to India’s strategic culture. Such platforms would democratise access to knowledge and foster transnational dialogue within the policy and academic communities. - Promote Case Study Analyses of Strategic Culture in Practice
Encourage the development of case studies that examine the influence of India’s strategic culture on specific policies or diplomatic and military initiatives, such as the MAHASAGAR policy (Mutual And Holistic Advancement for Security and Growth Across Regions). To advance such interdisciplinary scholarship, it is recommended that the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI) incorporate a dedicated pillar focused on Cultural Exchange and the Promotion of Indigenous Knowledge. This approach would formally embed historical and cultural perspectives within the region’s maritime strategy. - Engage Media to Narrate India’s Strategic Legacy
Partner with media professionals and filmmakers, while also leveraging the talent of educational content creators to produce accessible narratives, documentaries, and multimedia projects that trace the connections between India’s maritime heritage and its contemporary strategic posture. Such efforts can aid public understanding and stimulate an informed discourse on India’s role in global and regional affairs.
*******
About the Author
Ms Priyasha Dixit is a Research Associate at the National Maritime Foundation. Her area of focus is the enhancement of maritime consciousness in India — a theme that incorporates multiple issues of seminal importance including, inter alia, India’s maritime (seafaring) history (incorporating ancient Indian knowledge systems), the maritime history of the Indian Ocean, India’s maritime heritage and its underwater cultural heritage, as also the MAUSAM initiative of the Government of India. She may be contacted at indopac8nmf@gmail.com.
Endnotes:
[1] Vice Admiral Pradeep Chauhan, “An Overview of India’s Maritime Geopolitics: Hard Power Considerations”, Presentation, Internship Capsule at the National Maritime Foundation, 30 April 2025.
[2] Ibid
[3] European Union (Website), “Facts and figures on the European Union”,
[4] “The Instruments of National Power”, The Lightning Press: Intellectual Fuel for the Military, https://www.thelightningpress.com/the-instruments-of-national-power/?srsltid=AfmBOorweFSSLnhdZAESUPwNhSAJUxWgNqJkLRZsY93MUe34NTPRw5FD
[5] Snehal Sripurkar, “Sailing through Centuries: A Journey into the History of Indian Shipbuilding”, Enroute: Indian History, 6 July 2023 https://enrouteindianhistory.com/sailing-through-centuries-a-journey-into-the-history-of-indian-shipbuilding/
[6] Michael C. Skinner, Thesis: MA (History), Kalinga: Reconstructing a Regional History from the Sixth Century BCE to the First Century BCE, University of Hawaii Library, May 2005, https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/9d81ba23-58f7-45dc-af76-782d48f8097a/content
[7] Dr N K Sahu, “Historical Geography of Odisha”, Odisha Review, Government of Odisha, November 2016, https://magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2016/November/engpdf/24-33.pdf
[8] Dr Sila Tripati, “Ancient Ports of Kalinga”, Recent Advances in Marine Archaeology: Proceedings of the Second Indian Conference on Marine Archaeology of Indian Ocean Countries, NIO Digital Repository Service, January 1990, 192-194, https://drs.nio.res.in/drs/bitstream/handle/2264/3289/Recent_Adv_Mar_Archaeol_1991_192.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
[9] Sila Tripati, “Ancient Ports of Kalinga”, 192-194.
[10] Michael C. Skinner, “Kalinga: Reconstructing a Regional History from the Sixth Century BCE to the First Century BCE”.
[11] Sunita Panigrahy, “Ports, Port-Towns and Maritime Trade of Odisha during the Nineteenth Century”, Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (JETIR), Volume 7, Issue 4 (April 2020), 1811-1815. https://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2004447.pdf
[12] Dr Prafulla Chandra Mohanty, “Maritime Trade of Ancient Kalinga”, Orissa Review, Government of Odisha, November 2011, https://magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2011/Nov/engpdf/39-41.pdf
[13] Skinner, “Kalinga: Reconstructing a Regional History from the Sixth Century BCE to the First Century BCE”.
[14] Dr Sunil Kumar Patnaik, “Odisha and South-East Asia- A Study of Ancient Relations and Maritime Heritage”, Odisha Review, Government of Odisha, November 2015, 32.
https://magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2015/Nov/engpdf/26-37.pdf
[15] Sila Tripati, “Ancient Ports of Kalinga”, 192-194.
[16] Supriya Subhadarsini Sahoo, “Tapoi Katha: A Reconstruction of History through an Odia Folk Travel Narrative”, The European Conference on Arts & Humanities 2017: Official Conference Proceedings. https://www.academia.edu/34731350/Tapoi_Katha_A_Reconstruction_of_History_through_an_Odia_Folk_Travel_Narrative#:~:text=This%20paper%20aims%20to%20respond,an%20intra%2DAsian%20geography%20and
[17] Dr Sunil Kumar Patnaik, “Odisha and South-East Asia- A Study of Ancient Relations and Maritime Heritage”.
[18] Dr Benudhar Patra, “Connectivity and Beyond: Maritime Contacts of Kalinga with Java”, Odisha Review, Government of Odisha, November 2013, 56. https://magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2013/nov/engpdf/55-65.pdf
[19] VOI News, Editorial Team, “This is the Source of the History of the Kalingga Kingdom or Ho-ling: Location, Kings, Relics, And Collapses”, 28 March 2021. https://voi.id/en/memori/40774#:~:text=JAKARTA%20%2D%20Long%20before%20Indonesia%20was,this%20kingdom%20is%20Ho%2Dling.
[20] Dr Benudhar Patra, “Connectivity and Beyond: Maritime Contacts of Kalinga with Java”.
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!