Results 1 to 30 of 61

Thread: Mightiest empires of the 1700 century?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    The Laughing Knight Member Sir Beane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Heanor, Derbyshire, England
    Posts
    1,724

    Default Re: Re : Mightiest empires of the 1700 century?

    Quote Originally Posted by Meneldil View Post
    I'm fairly sure France was considered as the world superpower in the 18th c. Despite ruling over less lands than the UK, France itself was still the most populated European country, with the most modern and effective army.

    The economy was sure not in a good shape, since well, the country had been at war with everyone else for decades, and because Louis XIV was mostly interested in warring and building huge stuff to show how great he was.

    Things got bad after the death of the so-called Sun King, only to start to improve again at the end of the century, under Louis XVI, who somehow ended up getting his head separated from his body, even though he was by all standards a decent king. Then, against extraordinary odds, Revolutionary France achieved to fight off most of European powers, and to succesfully - that's where the fun starts - establish a continental Empire over most of Europe.

    Feel free to debunk that as nationalist crap (I'm French duhu), but that's more or less what I understood from my readings (most of them being the work of anglo-saxon historians).

    Serious contenders were obviously the British Empire, and the Russian Empire. Both were clearly the principal winners of the Napoleonic Wars, even though the British Empire quickly got the upper hand and became the new superpower, while Russia got stuck into an economical and social crisis that would last quite a while.
    You are most certainly correct that France was the number one power in Europe. Britian however was generally much stronger overseas than any other country, France included, especially towards the end of the century.

    It impossible to rank one as stronger than the other really. In continental Europe France would destroy Britain. At sea and in foreign lands however Britian tended to have the upper hand. No one power had a clear advantage, and they never fought in an all out war to destroy the other.

    Who wins in a battle or war is all about situational advantages anyway. Despite all of its tremendous power and size the British Empire lost to a bunch of uppity colonists in America. Had Britain not been distracted by France at the time then things might have been a different story.

    Likewise Napoleon rampaged across Europe in an incredibly succesful military campaign. Without Napoleon however France may never have conquered anyone at all.

    So basically what I mean is that Empires can be classified in terms of things like area of land held, or wealth, or number of men, but power and strength are both relative and situational. The question of who was the most powerful superpower don't really have an answer (at least not one that can stand up to every argument.)


    ~ I LOVE DEMOS ~

    . -- ---------- --
    . By your powers combined I am!
    . ----------------------


  2. #2
    is not a senior Member Meneldil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    France
    Posts
    3,074

    Default Re : Re: Re : Mightiest empires of the 1700 century?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Beane View Post
    So basically what I mean is that Empires can be classified in terms of things like area of land held, or wealth, or number of men, but power and strength are both relative and situational. The question of who was the most powerful superpower don't really have an answer (at least not one that can stand up to every argument.)
    While I see where you're coming from, the notions of power and strenght are not always relative.

    Since the early 90's, the US have been the only superpower, and I don't think anyone can deny that. Other regional powers don't have the capacity to rival the US, either militarily or economically, and thing will probably stay that way for a few more decades.


    Things were far less clear-cut in the 18th, most notably because the notion of total war wasn't entirely perceived, and because no country could realisticly have achieved total dominance over the other powers, but I still think it is assumed that France was the #1 superpower for most of the 18th, and was then replaced by Britain after Napoleon's fall (with Britain slowly being caught up by Germany - who got her ass kicked - and the US). That's how things are seen for International Relation studies purpose.
    It doesn't mean that France was teh awesome for a while, while UK wasn't. But us political sciences students like to rank stuff for the sake of ranking stuff ;-)

    Since the OP asked for a list, here shall be mine :
    1 - France
    2 - The United Kingdom (or whatever was the official name)
    3 - Russia
    4 - Austria
    And then, it's about it. Spain and Portugal, though still Empires, were in an increasingly dire shape, Sweden almost became an Empire but ultimately failed, and Prussia despite her glorious achievements, can't be considered an Empire.
    Last edited by Meneldil; 01-17-2009 at 02:18.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO