Mech, I've been to Hampi.....
Is that an ok Answer? The Vijayanagar Empire built that particular city did they not?.
Is that an ok Answer? The Vijayanagar Empire built that particular city did they not?.
Greatest Empire Ever
- Thread starter Jersay
- Start date
the best ones are those written by Indian authors, they are in English also...
normally those written by British authors tend to romanticise their conquests.
yep it was thier capital....did you knock on those pillars?
Didn't dare touch em, my dad was giving me evil looks as I attempted to..He's been there 3 times now, I was a bit suprised because we were in Goa for 3 weeks, we'd just come back from Mumbai via Tivum train station - VT and I expected a nice short journey from Calangute...didnt happen of course.
But yes, lovely people down there, but I really must stop bobbing my head in an "acha" fashion, it becomes quite addictive.
Daz
In defense of the American Empire, it is from the talents of Thomas Edison, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and organizations like CiscoSystems and US govt., that i can sit with a wireless computer on my lap, and speak to many wonderful intellectual citizens from other great nations ... sharing thoughts and ideas instantaneously.
How was the British Empire not as great as the Roman Empire? The British Empire conquered the world. The Roman Empire just conquered Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.
And the British Empire is still the largest empire to have ever existed.
The British Empire was the first truly global empire in history and Britain was the first world superpower.
I'm going with the British Empire. It controlled 25 of the world's land area and 50% of it's population at it's height. Most of this was done without outright conquest. The Indian subcontinent was controlled with only about 150,000 actual English. British tactics usually were to ally with a local prince and then supply him with modern arms and training for his troops. England did not send in legions or conquistadors to conquer locals. Local troops made up the bulk of the fighters (Indian Sepoys). Assimilation was not required. Subjagation to the British crown was (expulsion of Acadians from eastern Canada). China was taken by importing opium and addicting up to 1/3 of the population. While far from benign there have been far worse cases of whole sale murder and subjagation of local popualtions than the English. The Spanish were notoriously brutal. It was the British Empire which outlawed slavery in 1834 and attempted to erradicate it on a world wide basis (failing in dealing with the Yanks). This came about due to the hatred for the institution of slavery by most common Englishmen. Their livelihoods did not depend on slave labour as slaves make lousy factory workers. The English power base was based on mass production of consumer goods not agricultural products. This is why the northern states of America did not have a slave culture yet the south did. That said it did not stop the English from cutting fingers off Bangladeshi weaver so they could not compete with cheap machine looms in the north of England (after being "adequately" compensated).
so you wouldnt call the children in the cotton mills slaves then?....as much as I love my country, I know they played a very dastedly trick as far as slave labour goes....endentured labour...heard of it?...slavery by another name.
Did not want to go in to complete history of England, like I said not completely benign. And don't believe this was just a British issue neither.
Thats not exactly correct --if we take the spanish and portugeese empires together --which i think is reasonable ---ie iberian ----every text ive ever read on this matter clearly posits these as the first global empires---antedating the british by 200 years--
remember it was the spanish successes in the new world that sent the english on the wild jealous rampage to at first piratize the spanish empire ( seeing as they couldnt buid their own they would have to just steal from them) then try and build their own. the cross over point was not 1588-as is often stated by nationalistic british historians but closer to early 1800s---ie even though the spanish empire was declining after 1588-it was indeed by any measure more extensive and powerfull than the british up untill the ealy 1800s--so in some ways the british empire was ---a late starter---and much shorter lived---even spurious.
oh yes --also remember that spain and portugal build their allmost as extensive empires with a fraction of the technology that was availabe to the british and others as their opportuinty presented itself---
you upstarts you!
you upstarts you!
I hate the persian empire.
Alright, The British were quite the empire. One tiny island nation controling a huge portion of the globe? Quite impressive, but maybe that was the key to their success; one less thing to wory about, that whole invasion thing. I tip my hat to the British, not so much for science or medical advances, but for the pure economic exploitation of the world. Brings a tear to my eye.
The Mongols-HUGE land empire, but no culture to speak of. Barbarians.
The Greeks-Probably some of the grestest scientific advances ever happened at the height of the Greek Empire(not to mention Greek is the base language of many modern tongues). However, the constant civil war between the city states was their self inflicted demise. The only time they were really united was to fight of Xerxes I of Persia, and they kicked the ever loving **** out of him. Take the Battle of Thermopylae, 2 million against 300 Spartans and a handful of Thebians? I bow to you Leonidus of Sparta. Oh, and Alexander of Macedonia, fighting all the way into India, purely amazing. he brought culture into the piss poor Persian Empire (after he conquered the **** out of them
Rome-absolutely amazing, the greatest military power of all time. Save maybe the American army and the British Navy, but those are totally different points. Architecture, science, medicine, military, the romans had it all.
I wont even cramp my fingers with the Vikings, another failed group of Barbarians.
Persian Empire-not even worth mentioning but I hate them so much I'll continue. About 25 dynasties and the only one worth talking about were the caliphates of the Umyadds and the Abbasids, who werent even really affiliated with the Persians. So they had a few scientific and cultural advances, but all they controled was a vast expanse of desert wasteland. Every once in a while they'd get cocky and move to conquer, but every time they got out of the desert, theyd get the **** kicked out of them by some European Power(Rome, Macedonia, Greece) or someone even lower, like Tamerlane. Phh, Tamerlane, his name meant Timur the Lame. Jesus Christ. The Persian empire was balls man, pure balls.
China is also balls.
So, in conclusion, the greatest empire I would say is....Rome. Please comment back.
Alright, The British were quite the empire. One tiny island nation controling a huge portion of the globe? Quite impressive, but maybe that was the key to their success; one less thing to wory about, that whole invasion thing. I tip my hat to the British, not so much for science or medical advances, but for the pure economic exploitation of the world. Brings a tear to my eye.
The Mongols-HUGE land empire, but no culture to speak of. Barbarians.
The Greeks-Probably some of the grestest scientific advances ever happened at the height of the Greek Empire(not to mention Greek is the base language of many modern tongues). However, the constant civil war between the city states was their self inflicted demise. The only time they were really united was to fight of Xerxes I of Persia, and they kicked the ever loving **** out of him. Take the Battle of Thermopylae, 2 million against 300 Spartans and a handful of Thebians? I bow to you Leonidus of Sparta. Oh, and Alexander of Macedonia, fighting all the way into India, purely amazing. he brought culture into the piss poor Persian Empire (after he conquered the **** out of them
Rome-absolutely amazing, the greatest military power of all time. Save maybe the American army and the British Navy, but those are totally different points. Architecture, science, medicine, military, the romans had it all.
I wont even cramp my fingers with the Vikings, another failed group of Barbarians.
Persian Empire-not even worth mentioning but I hate them so much I'll continue. About 25 dynasties and the only one worth talking about were the caliphates of the Umyadds and the Abbasids, who werent even really affiliated with the Persians. So they had a few scientific and cultural advances, but all they controled was a vast expanse of desert wasteland. Every once in a while they'd get cocky and move to conquer, but every time they got out of the desert, theyd get the **** kicked out of them by some European Power(Rome, Macedonia, Greece) or someone even lower, like Tamerlane. Phh, Tamerlane, his name meant Timur the Lame. Jesus Christ. The Persian empire was balls man, pure balls.
China is also balls.
So, in conclusion, the greatest empire I would say is....Rome. Please comment back.
Last edited:
I think the Persian Empire was a pretty impressive one. http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/PERSIANS.HTM (tough to read unless you highlight the thing)
That would be bacause your famous fleet (aka the Spanish Armarda) lies at the bottom of the english channel and the North Sea, sunk by Drake and/or that darn English channel weather!! HA HA!
Mr. Gilbert,
The link you sent me only furthers my point. So the Persians conquered Mesopatamia, how many times has the Tigirs/Euphraytes River Valley changed hands? And, they started the first holy war, thanks for that Cyrus the Great! The last two paragrahs are the key parts. So they gain a vast expanse of desert wasteland, get cocky, and when they move to conquer a REAL civilization (Greece) they get absolutely obliterated. Thermopylae, Marathon-the two greatest battles ever, becuase Persians get owned. Please reply.
The link you sent me only furthers my point. So the Persians conquered Mesopatamia, how many times has the Tigirs/Euphraytes River Valley changed hands? And, they started the first holy war, thanks for that Cyrus the Great! The last two paragrahs are the key parts. So they gain a vast expanse of desert wasteland, get cocky, and when they move to conquer a REAL civilization (Greece) they get absolutely obliterated. Thermopylae, Marathon-the two greatest battles ever, becuase Persians get owned. Please reply.
Well it MUST be the way if the British supposedly excelled at it and the British Empire is still the largest to have ever existed.
And how can you have an Empire WITHOUT subjugating people?
And what do you expect us to do? Arrive in a country and say "Hello, do you mind if we ruled you?"
Let's just look at the facts (in brackets is the year at which the Empire was at its largest and its Head) -
British Empire - 36.6 million km² [1] (under King George V in 1921)
Mongol Empire - 33.2 million km² [1] (under Khublai Khan in 1279)
Spanish Empire - 19 million km² [1] (under King Phillip II)
Portuguese Empire - 10.4 million km² [1]
Roman Empire - 5.6 million km² [1] (under Emperor Trajan)
NOBODY has close close to the British Empire.
The British Empire was larger than the Spanish, Portuguese and Roman empires put together.
The Spanish Empire existed for 400 years at the most.
But the British Empire existed for far longer and probably started earlier. You can say that the British Empire started in the 1100s or 1200s with the English subjugation and rule of Ireland. In that case, the British Empire lasted for around twice as long as the Spanish.