Best Empire in History? (Corrected)

[The Lurker Below]

I think stability and cultural contributions have to count positively. Green is great, Black is middling, Red is weak.

Mongols-Enormous area for a short time but weak culture, soon disintegrated, empire based on ponies is a little girly.


Romans-Made the Greeks call themselves Roman. That alone is a monstrous achievement.

Muslims -Like Alexander a rapid yet enduring cultural tidal wave.

Alexander's Empire (Greece) Huge cultural beacon, unstable but the language and cultural footprint doubled the area of Hellenism.

Aztec-Savages unworthy of ruling the marvelous MesoAmerican cultures who couldn't wait to be rid of them.

Inca-Amazing expansion but unstable entity quickly toppled: nothing like the Aztecs but a similar fate.

Maya-Did the hard yards building up a fine civilisation that shared with its neighbours.

China-Most enduring cultural entity ever. Succesful politically, culturally, technologically and sometimes militarily. Its worst is not as bad as most and its best is up there with the best.

Japan-Unable to emulate Chinese, Mongol or European Empires. Small fry in this company.

Russian-Vast entity, stability troubles but seems to be going the distance. Relatively insignificant culturally (imported french culture, then Communism from Germany, failed to re-export Communism).

Mali-Not registering at this scale

American-More Punic than Roman, heart not in conquest, rather make a buck than a slave.

English-Correct appellation, ruled from London. Unstable but enormous entity, may have a lasting cultural effect through India and the USA.

Holy Roman Empire-Voltaire wasn't being fair but by the end it was definitely "neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire".

French-French conquests have been more unstable than the English but they kept a few more colonies and their shining cultural acheivements outshine English to date.

Spanish-Of the "gunpowder empires" (incl Moghuls, Russia and Ottomans) the most successful by far. A massive entity, huge residual influence on three continents, had the best helmets. The bit where they said "hmm, there might be a country over the horizon, lets conquer it" counts for a lot, although Portugal deserves a mention in that context. Why did I put them number 1? Accidently I guess, China probably wins on aggregate points.

Ottoman-Greco/Muslim fusion entity, surprisingly stable but lacking the cultural clout of the first Islamic tide or the durability of Russia (which has retained a far larger slice of its old Imperial pie).

Persian-Very admirable and surprisingly tolerant from the little I know, and a massive blazing cultural torch akin to Chinese Greek or French. but typical of iron age ME empires (assyrian, Babylonian, Median, Macedonian) : short lived, beset with wars and swiftly toppled by a determined aggressor.

this is a neat idea. i like the color coding. a few notes

Spanish - first impression I can't picture them as a great empire as their contemporary competition saw them as a bunch of inept slackers. but in retrospect maybe that makes their great success that much more impressive.

French - not seeing it at all, sorry

Americans - subdued more nations that any empire ever has or ever will. granted those were weak stone age peoples completely unprepared for what was coming, but they were completely, and frequently brutally, dominated. Americans only failed when they attempted conquest against other people in the iron age. ( Canadians)

[Louis VI the Fat]

'Savages', 'inept slackers', a certain casualness when discussing mass rape and conquests, of peoples still around or tragically disappeared.


I must ask you fine gentlemen for a little more dignified choice of language.

[Tsar Alexsandr]

'Savages', 'inept slackers', a certain casualness when discussing mass rape and conquests, of peoples still around or tragically disappeared.


I must ask you fine gentlemen for a little more dignified choice of language.

Agreed.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Spanish - first impression I can't picture them as a great empire as their contemporary competition saw them as a bunch of inept slackers. but in retrospect maybe that makes their great success that much more impressive.

ho-hum...

I am not sure the Spanish were seen as inept slackers. Although some vilification would not have been absent. Certainly the Spanish were not slackers in actual fact, so therefore Spain's Siglo de Oro, 'Golden Century', is not impressive for being the work of slackers.


The desperate strategic question in the 16th and 17th century, for the whole of Europe, was how to stop the Spanish (/Habsburgs). The Spanish, for their part, saw quite fit to simultaneously combat Protestantism, Islam, and subjugate the Americas plus vast holdings elsewhere. It was the Iberian slackers who organised the first global economy in this period, who started the period of European pre-eminence in the world.
For a hobby, they also patronised the arts (paintings, architecture, music), literature (if not invented it in this period with Cervantes), and religion, all three reaching peaks in Spain the rest of the civilised world could only admire in awe.


We speak English, so some some Anglocentricity is inherent. But the period of Anglo dominance is not much older than some two / two and a half centuries, Anlgo cultural pre-eminence not older than one. About as long as Spain's dominance lasted. Who knows, in a hundred years time Chinese culture and language may be dominant. And the period of Western dominance regarded a historical aberration.
(And some guy behind a computer insisting that the West, or Britain and America, really did have a Golden Age, of such cultural dominance that the rest of the world was left breathless, admiring or vilifying them in awe)

French - not seeing it at all, sorry

You can notice the legacy in your clothes, your manners, your tastes in the arts, your etiquette, your philosophy, your poetry and literature, your architecture, your political ideas. They are all 'soft', cultural legacies. Not immediately apparant. But they are every bit as present as more tangible legacies. French civilisation has been very influential in Europe, most notably so from the 17th to the 19th century.

In the same manner that I wear jeans, chew gum, have Han Solo for a hero, watched Disney as a kid, speak English. The impact of American culture on my life is enormous, as it is throughout the world. Even if the US were to dissappear overnight, the impact will have left a decisive and lasting legacy.

[Centurion1]

You should all read Genghis Khan and the making of the modern world. The impact that themongols had on all of us is astounding.

but i wrote my college admissions essay on genghis khan as a historical hero sowho am i to talk


*seriously for you applicants in the coming years go for something different.

[Cyclops]

this is a neat idea. i like the color coding. a few notes

Thank you, just trying to shorthand my thinking.

...Spanish - first impression I can't picture them as a great empire as their contemporary competition saw them as a bunch of inept slackers. but in retrospect maybe that makes their great success that much more impressive...

English tend to run Catholic Spain down but they were The Empire for a century or two, the first massive world spanning empire that (like France under Louis 14th and Napoleon) attracted basically the whole of Europe in opposition. Left a liguisitic footprint as dominant as English in its own way, although culturally less shining they partook of the "western" civilisation springing from Italy and France.

...French - not seeing it at all, sorry...

English as a language is a small geman skeleton inside a fat french body. "The Common Law" and Parliament were transplanted from Normandy by Frenchified vikings. Elite culture from the crusades to the 20th century is dominated by France, aided by others at times (mostly Northern Italian states). Military, scientific and political thought was dominated from or answering to Paris for centuries. I'd say that like China their conquest-cultural contribution ratio is very low, and they still mananged a colonial Empire second only to Britain in the 19th century.

...Americans...

Look the 13 colonies certainly spread over a wide area so thats a kind of conquest but the mismatch of tech levels doesn't suggest a succesful military entity, just a cultural tragedy for the Native Americans. My feeling is the USA lacks a killer instinct for conquest in the sense of diominating provinces but they certainly have a successful material culture and its relatively democratic/popular: its not really a culture for elites like French or Persian or Chinese (although they also have popular elements, they are not a patch on Hollyood/Motown/Detroit).

My guess is the USA sill takes a hge wad of its elite culture from France and Italy via England (French style wines in California, trips to Europe, classical music a la Paris/Vienna, snooty visual arts culutre a la Paris, snooty haute couture a la Milan etc). This is the stuff we judge Egyopt/Rome/Greece on in our Museums.

USA does have a large "material/popular culture footprint" but its military conquest side is unimpressive (as I say because I doubt they are an aggressive militray culture at heart) and we'll see about the longevity: they really only came to the fore in 1945.

[Centurion1]

we are a more militaristic nation than many others. you go to the south you see some boys ready to die for their country, god bless em.

California wine is california wine thats why it is distinguished but yes brands follow french wine culture because there has never been any other culture even attempted.

english draws most of its roots from germanic tribes and bastardized latin.

the us doesnt need colonies like the english did we are large and have all the resources we needed.

elite culture in america is not derived upon european trends. we dominate music, literature, etc. where do your musicians come to be published some to the uk but most to the us, we have the most used publishing houses in the world. America simply is modern popular culture and has been since the 1950's.

as for your elitist cultures,

Persians- dead and gone
French- relegated to france and the surronding area for the most part (some former colonies)
Chinese- even the chinese are becoming more western and their neighbors were still decidely different cultures from china.

English/American culture dominates the world.

[Tsar Alexsandr]

as for your elitist cultures,

Persians- dead and gone
French- relegated to france and the surronding area for the most part (some former colonies)
Chinese- even the chinese are becoming more western and their neighbors were still decidely different cultures from china.
[/QUOTE]

Elitist? Well what about Rome? They're also long dead. Same with the Greek empire and the Egyptian Pharoahs. Civilization began wit 'elite' cultures like the Persians. The Persians had a mighty empire with lasting significance. Iranians still call themselves Persian.

The French had more land that England and mantained it's colonies for a long time. Power limited to France itself? What about Libya? French Angola? French Indo-China? The owned all that land in America before they gave it to us. They had control of Canada until the French and Indian war was over. They sent troops to the rebellious colonials to help them establish our country of Amercia. How is France undeserving of the title of Empire?

And China is a very ancient powerful civilization. They have invented many things we use everyday. The wheelbarrow came from China. And so did paper money!

You have a right to your opinion of course. But what right do you have to say that these nations weren't significant empires? It's fine to say this empire wasn't as much as one as this one, or etc, but to deny that the nation, was, is, or had ever been an empire is just nonsense. Don't make claims you can't defend. : /

[Cyclops]

we are a more militaristic nation than many others.....

I see a strong isolationist tendency, and a really mature restraint post WW2 when sticking in massive control a la Soviets would've been a strong temptation.

I think the USA has an innate dislike of direct rule of others, so even if its desirable its hard to swing it (unlike say Napoleon who sort of had to conquer to stay in power)..

Is the "Empire of the 13 colonies" actually receding on the continental USA? I mean with the burgeoning latino culture?

...
as for your elitist cultures,

Persians- dead and gone
French- relegated to france and the surronding area for the most part (some former colonies)
Chinese- even the chinese are becoming more western and their neighbors were still decidely different cultures from china...

Persian: alive and well, probably a close second to English in India, dominant elite culture from central Asia through to Turkey. Omar Khayyam has even made it into English.

French: English culture is many ways merely an annexe to French. Is this even debated in the USA? Western culture is a generous way of saying the French with English/Spanish/Italian attached.

Chinese: definitely taken a blow from their encounter with "Western culture" and like the encounter with Buddhism they seem to have digested the lesson and are making it their own. Dominant culture from Korea to SE Asia (although Western, especially US, popular culture is ahead in Japan atm). Master Kung, Master Lao and Master Sun are household names in Australia, I guess the USA and Europe: are Jesus Aristotle or Plato even heard of in China? Maybe Jesus.

...

English/American culture dominates the world.

Yes they (we?) dominate the available cultural horizon the way Rome did in its day, albeit for a much shorter time so far. France did likewise and for longer (smaller world then) as did Islam and the Greeks. Will they (we) still be the dominant culture when our kids are old? I suspect in Australia English will be codiominant with Chinese but I can't guess what the USA will be like.

[The Lurker Below]

English tend to run Catholic Spain down but they were The Empire for a century or two, the first massive world spanning empire that (like France under Louis 14th and Napoleon) attracted basically the whole of Europe in opposition. Left a liguisitic footprint as dominant as English in its own way, although culturally less shining they partook of the "western" civilisation springing from Italy and France.



English as a language is a small geman skeleton inside a fat french body. "The Common Law" and Parliament were transplanted from Normandy by Frenchified vikings. Elite culture from the crusades to the 20th century is dominated by France, aided by others at times (mostly Northern Italian states). Military, scientific and political thought was dominated from or answering to Paris for centuries. I'd say that like China their conquest-cultural contribution ratio is very low, and they still mananged a colonial Empire second only to Britain in the 19th century.



Look the 13 colonies certainly spread over a wide area so thats a kind of conquest but the mismatch of tech levels doesn't suggest a succesful military entity, just a cultural tragedy for the Native Americans. My feeling is the USA lacks a killer instinct for conquest in the sense of diominating provinces but they certainly have a successful material culture and its relatively democratic/popular: its not really a culture for elites like French or Persian or Chinese (although they also have popular elements, they are not a patch on Hollyood/Motown/Detroit).

My guess is the USA sill takes a hge wad of its elite culture from France and Italy via England (French style wines in California, trips to Europe, classical music a la Paris/Vienna, snooty visual arts culutre a la Paris, snooty haute couture a la Milan etc). This is the stuff we judge Egyopt/Rome/Greece on in our Museums.

USA does have a large "material/popular culture footprint" but its military conquest side is unimpressive (as I say because I doubt they are an aggressive militray culture at heart) and we'll see about the longevity: they really only came to the fore in 1945.

I was agreeing with you re: the Spanish, it's just that much of my knowledge of them is simply part of the background to a course on the Tudors. Tudor England was not kind to the Spanish people in general, even if they were more than a little envious of the Hapsburgs and all their wealth.

France: the biggest plum of all never really did control a significant empire, it was the empire every other monarch wanted to control. Heck, in a thread not that long ago there were people here describing how the nation itself didn't coalesce until the Republic. When the Norman Vikings invaded England, was their culture really all that different from the Saxons they invaded? It's said that English barrows a little bit from many languages. No, English took other languages out to the back alley and mugged them. There might be something to be said for French domination of elite western culture if you didn't end up where you did on the Americans.

Americans: they can't be a great empire because they don't have impressive military conquest? huh. When did the French armies convert 1/3 of a continent to becoming part of the French nation. For that matter, and I hesitate to bring in the Chinese because I also agree they are/were a great empire, when did the Chines armies EVER leave SE Asia to conquer nations?

No, the American nation hasn't had an impressive military conquest, mostly as a side effect for what you first said: their heart isn't in it. Despite the fact that the Americans used a combination of top notch diplomacy (Russia, Britian, France, Spain all had claims in North America), dirty politics along with brutal military tactics (aboriginal Americans), they did remove nations from great tracts of land. When half of Mexico was signed over to the U.S. it was a modern army that was soundly beaten to create that result.

While you may not see much "heart" in the Americans desire to conquer, the truth is the nations Congress has been in declared war more years than it has been in peace. For certain the Americans have not been as brutal in their conquests as the recently popularly discussed Mongols, but I sure don't know anybody living around these parts that are the least bit proud of what our predecessors did to the aboriginal Americans. The Americans history of conquest was very shortlived, started well after anybody else on the list, and thankfully long over.

America goes to Black, French turns Red, Spanish I was all for Green to start.

[CiviC]

this is a neat idea. i like the color coding. a few notes

Spanish - first impression I can't picture them as a great empire as their contemporary competition saw them as a bunch of inept slackers. but in retrospect maybe that makes their great success that much more impressive.

I think you are influenced by "The Black Legend" (La Leyenda Negra).

French - not seeing it at all, sorry

If you refer to the colonial Empire, indeed, the French weren't so great "colonisers", though they had the largest population, they were the most reluctant to leave home country. We could say though they had the second best colonial Empire in the last 200 years.
But if we refer to The First French Empire (Napoleon I), it was a great Empire, very short lived indeed, but one of the most influencial entities in positive terms for Europe in the last 200 years. It was one of the largest and most powerfull Empires Europe knew in modern ages, alongside with The Third Reich, but in terms of quality it was opposite to Nazi Germany, being a "good" Empire, very progressive and a turning point in Europe's history, forcing the break from the feudal and absolutist past and opening a new age for a set of whole new advanced ideas. The French First Empire can be compared with the Empire of Alexander the Great, also a very large, short lived Empire, but significant by his ulterior influence on world's history and civilisation.

P.S. I voted Romans as they are the very definition of civilisation.

[Audacia]

Concerning the United States of America, we, (and not trying to sound like an arrogant nationalist here) have the strongest military in the world, able to deploy at any given moment in time, mobilize and strike whenever and wherever we would like. The U.S. boasts the second largest military in the world (just behind China), and an enormous amount of reserves to back up those if necessary on active duty. American military technology exceeds almost every other nation, yet America does not simply conquer the known world just because our government feels like it.

I would go as far to say, and not to offend anyone here, that the United States “military” could defeat any of those in the modern world. But to suggest the U.S. conquering various parts of the world is simply an outrageous proposition, and in a world of instant communication and considering complex diplomatic agreements, most likely impossible in this day and age.

The U.S. goes to war to defend American interests, and in many ways, democracy as a whole. We are the Police of the World, and the United States military responds to more global conflicts and engagements that threaten global security than any other nation. We do not go to war in order to loot and pillage or whatever simply because it is not the right thing to do. I would argue we shall stand as a nation that fought for good, and although the US has made many mistakes and wrong decisions, treated people badly and oppressed others, this country fights for the freedom of others many more times than it fights for itself. I mean seriously, look at this last century, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, and yes, even Iraq and Afghanistan, were fought in order to help those oppressed by the forces of Communism, Dictatorships, tyranny, oppression, and all together evil.

Now after all this, I still voted Roman Empire lol, because I do not really consider the US as an empire, but more as a nation that stands as a symbol for others to look up to, not to conquer the known world.

[CiviC]

American military technology exceeds almost every other nation, yet America does not simply conquer the known world just because our government feels like it.

US is strong because her allies, too. If US would start to act like an Empire and conquer and annex various territories, most allies (starting with Europe) would desert her. Despite her superior technology, U.S. can't conquer the world by herself because the power of the rest of the world would overwhelm her. U.S would have problems to defeat Russia+Europe+China+Japan in a conventional war, but also US would have big problems to mantain occupation and counter insurgencies and guerillas. Not to consider the effects on US economy of a global war. Americans can strike anywhere on the globe because friendly countries who offer support but US alone would have a hard time to mantain her supremacy. Already in the post Cold War multipolar world US is no longer regarded as the sole uncontested superpower, but many challangers emerge.

I will not comment on the rest of hyper patriotic discourse.

[ReluctantSamurai]

My vote goes to an empire not on the list: the Ancient Egyptian Dynasties, in particular, the Old Kingdom or Kingdom of the Pyramids.

From them we get some of the world's earliest literature, advanced mathematics (which the Greeks borrowed heavily from), early forms of practical medicine, technology such as the ramp, the lever, rope trusses, paper, and of course.......the Pyramids and all they entail (mathematics, astronomy, and engineering).

[Tabuu]

My vote goes to an empire not on the list: the Ancient Egyptian Dynasties, in particular, the Old Kingdom or Kingdom of the Pyramids.

From them we get some of the world's earliest literature, advanced mathematics (which the Greeks borrowed heavily from), early forms of practical medicine, technology such as the ramp, the lever, rope trusses, paper, and of course.......the Pyramids and all they entail (mathematics, astronomy, and engineering).

Apologizes for the absence of Egypt, but i do feel this vote is coming to a close. If you want it to end, just sya the word.

[Megas Methuselah]

Now after all this, I still voted Roman Empire lol, because I do not really consider the US as an empire, but more as a nation that stands as a symbol for others to look up to, not to conquer the known world.

Hate to burst your nationalistic bubble, but:

1) The USA is not a nation
and
2) It's not exactly the best model to look up to, mane. Seriously, how could you even state such a thing? I don't mean to sound too insulting or personal, but wow.

[Tsar Alexsandr]

Hate to burst your nationalistic bubble, but:

1) The USA is not a nation
and
2) It's not exactly the best model to look up to, mane. Seriously, how could you even state such a thing? I don't mean to sound too insulting or personal, but wow.

Why wouldn't you call the USA a nation? Just curious.

Lol. He says some pretty ironic things. After all, didn't Rome see itself as a model for the world? A model to look up to and emulate? America is the modern Roman Empire. We just don't kill people in stadiums.

I'm from the USA. But I think were far from worthy of being anyone's role model. We're not perfect, we've made a lot of mistakes, and without aknowleging most of them or correcting them, but there are some things good about it. We had some noble ideas in it's founding. All men should be equal, and I hope we're still trying to honor that. I know I do.

[Skullheadhq]

The US is a rolemodel for who? Canada?

[Louis VI the Fat]

The US is a rolemodel for who?

For me.

[Meneldil]

Why wouldn't you call the USA a nation? Just curious.

From an european point of view, the US is more like a bunch of different people living in the same geographical area and trying to make profit. The same applies to Canada as well. Different communities living in different neighbourhoods and avoiding contact with eachothers as much as possible.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Apologizes for the absence of Egypt

No apologies necessary The Old Egyptian Dynasties are often overlooked for a lot of reasons, one of which, I believe, is that they are not touched upon much in history classes. I was fortunate enough to have a grade school teacher who did, and my imagination was always fired by trying to imagine what it was like during all those thousands of years (ca. 3100 BC to ca. 340 BC).