<p>Wikipedia's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Buddhism_in_India" rel="nofollow">History of Buddhism in India</a> says that:</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurya_Empire" rel="nofollow">Maurya Empire</a> (322 BCE–185 BCE) was Buddhist</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushan_Empire" rel="nofollow">Kushan Empire</a> (30 CE–375 CE) was Buddhist</li>
</ul>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Buddhism_in_India" rel="nofollow">Decline of Buddhism in India</a> says that decline began in late <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire" rel="nofollow">Gupta Empire</a> (320 CE–550 CE)</p>

<p>So for more than 500 years, there were Buddhist empires ruling the whole of what's now India except its southern tip.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-02T08:16:53.073Z
2015-01-02T08:16:53.073Z
ChrisW
<p>I read in a book by <code>Amartya Sen</code> <code>'The Argumentative Indian'</code>, (<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=agk63AlLmIgC&amp;lpg=PA187&amp;vq=thousand&amp;pg=PR12#v=snippet&amp;q=thousand&amp;f=false" rel="nofollow">link</a>) that Buddhism was the dominant religion of India for about a 1000 years, and that foreigners referred to India as a Buddhist kingdom. Is it true?</p>

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Buddhism#mediaviewer/File:Buddhist_Expansion.svg" rel="nofollow">This</a> map from wikipedia shows that Buddhism was influential only in a small part of North-East India, and not at all in the southern or western part. Kindly provide online references, if possible.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-02T08:17:55.980Z
This question seems to be about history, not about Buddhism. It might be better to ask it on [History.SE](http://history.stackexchange.com/).
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-03T01:31:55.447Z
[This question has now been asked on History.SE](http://history.stackexchange.com/q/17772)
ChrisW
<history><books>
Was Buddhism the dominant religion of India for one thousand years?
# Was Buddhism the dominant religion of India for one thousand years?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-01-02)

I read in a book by `Amartya Sen` `'The Argumentative Indian'`, ([link](http://books.google.com/books?id=agk63AlLmIgC&lpg=PA187&vq=thousand&pg=PR12#v=snippet&q=thousand&f=false)) that Buddhism was the dominant religion of India for about a 1000 years, and that foreigners referred to India as a Buddhist kingdom. Is it true?

[This](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Buddhism#mediaviewer/File:Buddhist_Expansion.svg) map from wikipedia shows that Buddhism was influential only in a small part of North-East India, and not at all in the southern or western part. Kindly provide online references, if possible.

**Tags:** history, books

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: This question seems to be about history, not about Buddhism. It might be better to ask it on [History.SE](http://history.stackexchange.com/).  
> **username_1**: [This question has now been asked on History.SE](http://history.stackexchange.com/q/17772)  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2015-01-02. Score: 2

Wikipedia's [History of Buddhism in India](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Buddhism_in_India) says that:

* [Maurya Empire](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurya_Empire) (322 BCE–185 BCE) was Buddhist
* [Kushan Empire](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushan_Empire) (30 CE–375 CE) was Buddhist

[Decline of Buddhism in India](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Buddhism_in_India) says that decline began in late [Gupta Empire](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire) (320 CE–550 CE)

So for more than 500 years, there were Buddhist empires ruling the whole of what's now India except its southern tip.


---

