In your opinion: British East India Company?

In your opinion could the British East India Company have established themselves as a "country" on their own? (so to speak)

Why or why not?In your opinion: British East India Company?
To be honest, they did. The 'capital' was Calcutta, which is a port. 'John Company' was a trading company and had mainly good relations with the numerous maharajahs.

The British East India Company arrived in India in the early 1600s, struggling and nearly begging for the right to trade and do business. By the late 1700s the thriving firm of British merchants, backed by its own army, was essentially ruling India.

In the 1800s English power expanded in India, as it would until the mutinies of 1857-58. After those very violent spasms things would change, yet Britain was still in control. And India was very much an outpost of the mighty British Empire.

Regular British troops only arrived after other European countries realised the commercial value of trading with India.

See also: Clive of India.

Things really started to fall apart in 1857. Whether the Mutiny was really about greased cartridges which had to be bitten into and offended religious taboos held by both Muslim and Hindu sepoys (Indian soldiers) is not altogether clear, but the situation of the British in India started to go downhill from then on. It took 90 years for India to gain independence from the 'Great' British Raj and the British managed to bungle that, resulting in Partition, with the state of Pakistan being divided into West Pakistan bordering Persia to the west and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) on the eastern side of the sub-Continent.In your opinion: British East India Company?
both yes and no. the Company was very powerful but its power came from the Crown. had they rebeled their income would have vanished and the Royal navy would have hunted their ships down- even assuming that the Britishers in the service of the Company would have gone along with treason