Most powerful empire in history

To 500 BCE
1. Achaemenid Empire

500 BCE - 500 CE
2. Han Empire
3. Roman Empire

500 CE - 1500 CE
4. Mongol Empire
5. Caliphate
6. Tang Empire

1500 CE - 2000 CE
7. British Empire
8. United States
9. USSR
10. Spanish Empire

I think that's a fair distribution to all the time periods. Of course, if you're measuring total influence, modern states will dominate ancient ones.


Edited by Imperator Invictus

I think all the European colonial empires deserve to be in the list. They were all large and powerful as hell  and overlooked the Portuguese and Spanish empires seems to be an heresy for me.

I begin with Achaemenid, but as say Maju before there are others; my problem is that i should generaliza the centuries, for example the Caliphate, strong by 815 but weak at 890:

VI-IV BC, Achaemenids
III-II, not very clear (greeks, chinese, indians...)
II-I, Han China-Rome (two worlds, the first most strong)
I-II AC, Roman Empire-Han China (the first more powerful)
III-VI, Roman Empire-Sassanian Persia
VII-VIII, Tang China-Caliphate
IX, not very clear (franks, byzantines, arabs)
X, Byzantine Empire
XI, not very clear (Song, Byzancium, Fatimids...)
XII, not very clear
XIII, Mongol Empire
XIV, not very clear
XV, Ming China-Ottoman Empire
XVI, Ming China-Spanish Empire-Ottoman Empire
XVII, France-Qing China-Ottoman Empire
XVIII, England-France-Qing China
XIX, British Empire (i think, the most powerful and influential of history)
XX, USA-USSR-Germany
XXI, USA (-�China?)

It seems you cannot count... why does three follow two II.. THe admin has lost his mathematic sense will be in tomorrow newspapers.

Thanks for pointing that out. Then I think the extra spot should go to the Spanish Empire.




Edited by Imperator Invictus

Us is not an empire

Ottomans power was more that both mongols and Tang together

Acheamanids main power is after 500 b.c.

Romans main power is after 300 b.c.

5-7 cent. Centuries Gokturks were pretty good (in mongol type)

the word "empire" was appeared first in Romans

I think, if we ganne make them meet, USSR would win

Originally posted by Kafkazli Ottomans power was more that both mongols and Tang together

Wow, I never cease to be amazed at the nationalism of the Turks. Certainly, the Ottoman Empire was a large and powerful empire. But from there to go and say that it was more powerful than the Mongol and the Tang empires put together, that's a huge stretch of imagination. Of course, for one thing you're comparing apples and oranges, as the Ottoman empire came later and had firearms. But in terms of relative power and influence, Tang China in the 8th century was comparable with the Ottomans in the 16th century, and the Mongols in the 13th-early 14th century far superior. You really should study more history, my nationalist friend.

Edited by Decebal

Originally posted by Kafkazli Us is not an empire Ottomans power was more that both mongols and Tang together Acheamanids main power is after 500 b.c. Romans main power is after 300 b.c. 5-7 cent. Centuries Gokturks were pretty good (in mongol type) the word "empire" was appeared first in Romans I think, if we ganne make them meet, USSR would win

300 AD for the romans not BC.

also the Umayyads and the early years of the Abbasides were the strongest in the world at their time.

 

Is there even a point to this argument?

 

Well Exarchus,

The Russian Empire is quite impressive by its size but most of the territory is just non-inhabited land (on the map where there are no cities) - which makes it easier to conquer.

I mean, taking Constantinople is quite the achievement, followed by Damascus, Jerusalem, Cairo, Mecca, Athens and Belgrade... That is not comparable - I think - to Bukhoro, Warsaw and Vladivostok... i am trying to compare the strenght of the opposition(s) during there time they were conquered.

The Spanish did not have to much trouble conquering Central and Latin America (diseases from Europe doing a great job for them).

If i m not mistaking, BMC21113 also mentionned effectiveness of government - which makes Spain the counter example : repatriating all the gold from LA and keeping its feodal system - not enhancing their production means and buying from its neighbour countries (repumping the gold into the European economy ). One of my french Economic History teachers told us it was one of the most counter-productive enterprises in history.

Spanish and Portugese (Brasil, Angloa, Mozamique...) empires - in my opinion - do not deserve a place in the most powerfull empires throughout history.

I agree with the colonial empires (English and French), Rome - of course -, Persian and Tang... but not Russian and Spanish.  

Cheers.

I think that the most powerful and influential empire of the history is the British empire.

There are two main revolutions in the human evolution: the neolithic revolution, and the industrial revolution. All the empires previous to 1800 are empires based in agriculture, but, the british empire is the first industrial empire; this new culture was diffused by the english to all the world. After the british empire, all the empires are variants of this empire.

And, was the most vasted empire. And all the world, and this is the first time that we can say this, all countries, need must dealed with the british.