Greatest Empires

Originally posted by Red4tribe ...

You must count too the Balears, Ceuta, Melilla and several small mediterranean islands as "overseas"Spain, but of course isn't now an empire, my god ; true we are today more or less, according with an economical rank, in the first 10. But historically i prefer the classifications of the first pages of this post in groups and not the empires one by one.

As for the matter of technological advances and such, one cannot give entire credit to one civilization over the others. It is no coincidence that the Ancient World was the siege of many succeeding civilizations. What must noticed here is that trade between different regions made it possible for advances to get rid of distances and created a small "global village" - - though this term is used as an anachronism here. One can point that isolated civilizations rarely surpassed what was present in Europe and the Middle East. Advances are made by parts which aren�t necessarily exclusive to any particular region.

As for the question at hand, I do not believe that any empire was greater than the other. The Roman Empire instituted much of modern western thought, but also brought international segregation. One can securely assert that western external policy is quite different than its interior policy in terms of what is "fair" and what is not. This conception of having two different sets of moral values is very Roman in nature. A roman citizen received a far different treatment than those who were declared "barbarians" - - this, more often than not, solely on the basis of culture. Analogously, today, in the west, we claim ourselves to be civilized and show contempt for those who we deem uncivilized.

Edited by werg - 25-Feb-2007 at 14:46

Originally posted by Disraeli 9 Portuguese Empire, longevious even if everchanging in dimension.

Originally posted by Maharbbal Fred, I don't want to look like the Camoesist of the forum but quite interestingly you are stating the opposite of most of the (economic) hitories I've read about the Casa de India and all that stuff. You're saying they were much too much profit-minded to be a real Empire, but they are arguing that the Portuguese were not enough profit-minded to be an efficient commercial venture. They're saying that basically, they were counting on violence (as many state) to persive taxes from Asian traders. In a sens the definition of Empire is correct for Portugal after 1500 if you consider it a maritime empire. My point of view.

Edited by Frederick Roger - 27-Feb-2007 at 15:53

I think that the greatest was the Holy Roman Empire.

1st OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Originally posted by Jagiello   And why should the Ottoman empire be the first,besides that you are turkish?

Size isn�t everything!

 

 

I think what may make an empire worthy of being considered great is it�s enduring legacy mor than its size, so for that reason I would pick firstly the British Empire, then the American empire, then the Roman empire.

 

I think America should be considered an empire. It conquered a large chunk of North America and its military, economic and cultural reach is global.

 

 

I agree too, Penelope. The legacy of an empire, and its impact on the present (at the time it was/is around) and future. On these terms, I would have to say the Roman and British Empires are definitely worthy of being called 'Great'. 

Originally posted by pinguin   Now, for the British to be considered "great", I doubt it. Yes, Brits contributed to the world greatly with the development of the scientific and technological revolutions, with Newton an Watt, so to speak.   However, the existence of theirs worldwide Empire was short an superficial, to say the least: 150 years in North America and Australia, less than a hundred in Africa, two centuries in India.   Portugal, Spain, Dutchland, Britain, France, Russia, all of them developed empires one time or another, and I don't see why the British Empire should be considered outstanding in comparison, (particularly considering how fast Britain has declined and  become just another country more)   By the way, It is time Brits forget about playing Romans. Go back home: return the Malvinas   Pinguin

Pinguin most empires only last for a short time the Roman empire is one of the exceptions not the rule, so 150 years ruling a large overseas territory is pretty good and two centuries in India while virtually ruling the entire subcontinent for over one hundred of these is more than virtually any native Indian power achieved (no offense to Indians as Pataliputra was one of the greatest cities in the world when the british were still living in earthen huts).

Futheremore (in your opinion) in thier short time at the top they changed the world drastically both for better and for worse: they were great practitioners to the slave trade and without them there would not be many people of African ancestry in the USA however they were also the first to outlaw slavery and as they were the most powerful nation on earth at the time others followed suit, these event have hugely effected history they also started the Industrial revolution which completely changed the world as well, they were crucial to the defeat of Napoleon, they colonised many countries in the Americas and pacific virtually wiping out the native populations and creating what would become incredibly wealthy nations from scratch, they made the english language the most important language in the world and finaly the governments and laws of dozens of countries from Canada in the North to Australia in the south are based on thiers.

the legacy of the "short lived" british empire is enormous and you would do well to recognise it Pinguin as it is probably all around you.

Regards
Praetor


Edited by Praetor - 24-Mar-2007 at 10:02