Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Hyperpowers of history.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Mumbloid View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 04-Jun-2007
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 97 		  Quote Mumbloid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Hyperpowers of history.
    Posted: 19-Jun-2007 at 02:45
 
 
Huns did not have a strong cultural influence simply because they were nomads.
 
exactly.
 
 
Mongols were nomads too, but they had strong influences in Asia by other means.
 
dead the khan, dead the empire. It doesent sound like a hyperpower.
 
Alexander's Empire was soon divided after his death but its cultural influence was very longlasting(Helenistic era)
 
sure, but a hyperpower needs something more than just a cultural or terrirotial expantion. It need a long lasting military, political and cultural influence and first at all it need to survive it's founder.
 As far as I can see, only Rome did have what it takes.....and in the far east Han.
 
 


Edited by Mumbloid - 19-Jun-2007 at 02:50
The future keeps the past alive.
Back to Top
Dream208 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 22-Jan-2006
Location: China
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 176 		  Quote Dream208 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jun-2007 at 08:42
Originally posted by Mumbloid

Originally posted by Dream208

At the height of Rome there was Han dynasty in China, which is, as many argues, stronger than Rome even during its height.
 
possible but irrilevant.
 
 
You gotta looked "outside" the Midterranean world.
 
sorry I cant. Rome was located in the mediterran, and it had a unseen worlwide influence, even greater than the han dynastie.
 In the historical contex ROME didnt have rivals, not even the Han dynastie. The influence of Rome lasted for eons and even now we are influenced, and guess what, even the sucessor of the Han dynastie are influenced by the ancient rome.
 I dont care if in AUSTRALIA or SOUTHAMERICA there was another giant mega power. It's irrilevant.
 in the historical contex of the ancient world Rome is unbeated. sorry!
 
 
Roman Empire was great, but it was never a power with no rival. Druing its entire existence from the Republic to the Imperial, dynasties in the Far-East rivaled its power head to head, shoulder to shoulder.
 
no. At the time of it's peak there was no major power that could rival with her. Not even Persia.
 
 
While the Western world forged itself under the shadow of Rome, its Eastern counterpart forged itself under the shadow of Han.
 
and this is more or less irrilevant.
 
The sucesors of HAN (china) are learning in their school the latin alfabet.
 

 
 
 
 
Can't say I am agree with you Mumbloid:
 
You are using the recent European success as the reason of Rome's power over Han. But you overlooked several factors:
 
1. The recent European acension is far from Rome's contribution. Rome did have its influences over the post-Reneissance Europe, but never a promiment factor. Much of European ideas had its root in Greek civlization, Rome of course helped its preservasion, but so did the Islamic Caliphs, and other Midditerranean powers.
 
2. The European acension is a recently phennomenon compared to entire recorded human history. Even if you wanted to argue that Western influence over China during the past 100 years means Rome > Han, you must also look at other period of history where Han/Chinese cultures exerted greater achievement and influences to the world.
 
3.  There are of course many mordern cultures rooted in the West, but not all of them. And you can't say that because we are all using Arabic numeral this day that the India civilization was the hyper power without equal.
 
 
     One can argue that Han dynasty's legacy survived in the Far East longer, and more presistence than Rome.  This of coruse will lead to other debates, which I have no intention to enegage in a debate yet.
     
     I also can;t agrre with your arguement that during Rome's height (presumably during Emperor Augustus or Trajan) it had no rivals. The Western and Eastern Han dynasties which were its comtemporary had equal, if not greater, military, economic, governemental powess. 
 
 
Thank you for your reply
Back to Top
Scheich View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 07-Jun-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 183 		  Quote Scheich Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jun-2007 at 13:20
USA and Russia can destroy each other completely.
Do you think that the British Empire could conquer Russia in 1860?!
The Roman Empire couldn't conquer Germania and the Hun hordes were too powerful in the 5th century!
 
I made a list:
 
My opinion: 1800-1815 France (no single country was able to defeat Napoleon)
                   1815-1907 British Empire(was able to overrun USA and only would have problems with the landforces of Germany and Russia)
                   1907-1917 German Empire(was able to overrun the largest economy(USA) and was stronger than France, Austria-Hungary, Russia and was able to defeat the British Empire in a long war(if every other country stays neutral), because German Industry and steel production was larger)
                   1919-1922 British Empire(was able to overrun USA, Germany and SU(because of civil war) and was stronger than Italy, Japan and France)
                   1922-1940 no most powerful country(Germany,SU,USA,UK)
                   1940-1953 USA(no country was able to rush USA because of strong US-navy and USA would win a long war)
 
Back to Top
Mumbloid View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 04-Jun-2007
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 97 		  Quote Mumbloid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jun-2007 at 15:56
Originally posted by Dream208

 
 
Can't say I am agree with you Mumbloid:
 
ok...sounds good...
 
 
You are using the recent European success as the reason of Rome's power over Han. But you overlooked several factors:
 
no, I am using the entire western civilitation to affirm that Rome was a hyperpower.
 
 
1. The recent European acension is far from Rome's contribution. Rome did have its influences over the post-Reneissance Europe, but never a promiment factor. Much of European ideas had its root in Greek civlization, Rome of course helped its preservasion, but so did the Islamic Caliphs, and other Midditerranean powers.
 
excuse me, but must of the western civilitation are based on rome, from it istitution, to law system, to culture, alphabet, numerics...now if you are somehow biased against Rome that's your problem not mine. But Rome has all the paper in order to be a hyperpower...like it or not.
 
 
Thank you for your reply
 
you are welcome.
 
 
The future keeps the past alive.
Back to Top
Mumbloid View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 04-Jun-2007
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 97 		  Quote Mumbloid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jun-2007 at 15:59
Originally posted by Scheich

USA and Russia can destroy each other completely.
Do you think that the British Empire could conquer Russia in 1860?!
The Roman Empire couldn't conquer Germania and the Hun hordes were too powerful in the 5th century!
 
No, the romans didnt want to conquer Germany (what use was for the romans xxxxxmiles of forest?), that's different, and in the end the Huns were defeated.
 
 
The future keeps the past alive.
Back to Top
kurt View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358 		  Quote kurt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jun-2007 at 07:04
Some candidates i'd like to mention are the Birtish Empire during the 19th century, the Mongol Empire under Ogedei Khan, the Persians under Cyrus the Great, USA 1991 onwards, the Byzantine Empire under Justinian I, Tang China, the Ottoman Empire during the 16th century, the Caliphate under Abu Bakr, Timurid dynasty under Timur himself, the Seljuks under Malik Shah, the Huns under Atiila. Whether or not they qualify is up for debate, but they certainly deserve candidate status.
 
If the battle of Waterloo hadn't come to pass i would also suggest France during the reign of Napoleon.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jun-2007 at 19:43

Egypt probably reached its greatest territorial expansion throughout the reign of Ramses II (1279 BC to 1213 BC). I'll give ancient Egypt credit as the first supper power in western civilization, and because he ruled for 68 years, I consider it long enough to upscale Ramses Egypt to the "hyperpower" status.



Edited by MagisterMilitum - 21-Jun-2007 at 20:27
Back to Top
retaxis View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 24-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote retaxis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jun-2007 at 10:05
In my opinion America is nothing special. It is a very new country and its power in the spot light is even shorter. People argue that America can control the four corners of the world whereas no civilization before can. Of course...It is the 21st century and anything within this world is possible. A thousand years ago it wasn't even possible.

A true hyper power is when country is so far advanced then any other in the world.

As Rome can not reach and defeat China during the Han period and China can not defeat the Romans, we can basiclly say the Chinese and Romans were once hyper powers as they were the strongest powers within their particular "world"
Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 526 		  Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jun-2007 at 13:34
i disagree that U.S is a hyperpower as they could not with all of their famous navy, aircraft or any infantry unit and the help of NATO, have not defeat Vietnam nor Iraq(yet, and there will be always some1 who desire to be independent)...yes they have the greatest economic power and military and even cultural, but as u see they are helped by the NATO in Iraq and yet, there is still war or disorders.
and until there will be a Russia or China, U.S could not be definite a hyperpwer,
for a hyperpower i vote for the british empire
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
Larus View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 28-Apr-2007
Location: Bosnia Hercegovina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 54 		  Quote Larus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jun-2007 at 16:44
Originally posted by mike

A Hyperpower is a power that is so strong that no other states are even close to competing it, it also dominates most of the globe so what are some hyperpowers in history?

 

The United States is definitely one and perhaps the only


Definetely not-  Russia, among others has enough nukes and firepower to shift the Earth out of its orbit and end the human race. I would call that enough power to compete. I thing that Russian military is superior in conventional weapons to that of the U.S. but even if you disagree, it doesn't really matter, does it? I don't think that the "duck and cover" tactic is very helpful if our dear planet is literary split in half or in the best case scenario is at start of a long and cold nuclear winter. 
There never was a hyperpower and hopefully never will be...
Back to Top
Donasin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 13-Dec-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 108 		  Quote Donasin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 00:33
I don't think there ever was or will be a hyperpower until say the EU and US or China and Russia join in a union which will never happen.

Rome and Han were superpowers, and as stated before, were not able to conquer let alone fight each other. A hyperpower needs to go to the four corners of the world and be able to extend its grip to all those corners. The US while a major influence can not yet make its will law.


Edited by Donasin - 25-Jun-2007 at 00:36
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457 		  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 01:43

Oh my goodness, some of you guys are really being unkind to the British Empire. Perhaps more than a scoop of bias here! Havent you all heard the slogan God is in his heaven, the Queen is on her throne, so therefore alls right with the world? then we have the old saying God is an Englishman.. The only Empire on which the sun never sets. Im sure you are all suitably impressed.

 Land of hope and glory, mother of the free
How shall we extol who are born of thee?

Perhaps it would be better if I said Land of little hope and fading glories!! But how can any American say they are stronger when the British pound is worth two American dollars, two dollar bills are needed!

To be more serious, an old saying from the Wisdom of Elenos says Every nation has had or will get their chance to rule the world. The world turns and so do the fortunes of nations. They came and they go, so you never know what will happen next.  
elenos
Back to Top
Larus View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 28-Apr-2007
Location: Bosnia Hercegovina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 54 		  Quote Larus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 08:40
Originally posted by elenos

Oh my goodness, some of you guys are really being unkind to the British Empire. Perhaps more than a scoop of bias here! Havent you all heard the slogan God is in his heaven, the Queen is on her throne, so therefore alls right with the world? then we have the old saying God is an Englishman.. The only Empire on which the sun never sets. Im sure you are all suitably impressed.

 Land of hope and glory, mother of the free
How shall we extol who are born of thee?

Perhaps it would be better if I said Land of little hope and fading glories!! But how can any American say they are stronger when the British pound is worth two American dollars, two dollar bills are needed!

To be more serious, an old saying from the Wisdom of Elenos says Every nation has had or will get their chance to rule the world. The world turns and so do the fortunes of nations. They came and they go, so you never know what will happen next.  



I can say that British Empire was one of the greatest Empires (maybe even the greatest) the world has ever known, but still not strong enough to be THE hyperpower according to the standards defined at the beginning of this thread.
Hopefully no nation will ever get it's chance to rule the world, for everyone's sake because those who attempted always failed and usually pay the huge price causing pain and suffering upon themselves and others in the process.
Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 526 		  Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 08:52
so ,there was not and never will be a hyperpower, hopefully
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457 		  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 09:30
Perhaps the differences between nations is of advantage in preventing the rise of a hyperpower. 
elenos
Back to Top
dick View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 21-Mar-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 23 		  Quote dick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2007 at 21:03
"The height of the Mongols power came under Kubilai, when Song China had been defeated, and places as far away as Java were vassals to Mongol dominance."
Under Kublai the Mongol empire isn't even a single empire anymore, it was fragmented into 5 khanates.
Back to Top
dick View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 21-Mar-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 23 		  Quote dick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2007 at 21:05
"no. At the time of it's peak there was no major power that could rival with her. Not even Persia."
 
 
No at its height, the Han dynasty surpassed it in territorial extent and population.
 
 
"no, I am using the entire western civilitation to affirm that Rome was a hyperpower."
 
No you can't, today's event has no relevance to the past. In your logic, if in the future, evernone starts speaking Korean, does that mean north Korea is the strongest country in the world today? No. You have to use the military, territory, population, and organization to compare. And Rome is easily outmatched by the Han in these areas.


Edited by dick - 29-Jun-2007 at 21:12
Back to Top
greattang View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 29-Jun-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote greattang Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Jun-2007 at 21:44
Has anyone read S.A.M. Adshead's book called Tang China?
 
Basically, he divides the development of a state into four quadrants. The political, the economical, the intellectual, and the social. He indicates that there is only two state in history which excelled in all four quadrants at once. One is Tang China, the other is the United States.
 
The other candidates all fail in this respect. Rome might compare favorably to the Han in three quandrants, but is not as strong economically. The British Empire might have political and economic preponderance, but social progress lies in France and intellectual preponerance lies in Germany.
 
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394 		  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Jun-2007 at 00:06
Originally posted by greattang

The other candidates all fail in this respect. Rome might compare favorably to the Han in three quandrants, but is not as strong economically.


True, but it was still extraordinarily powerful, economically, and dominant in that part of the world in a way not seen until Britain industrialized. It doesn't have to exceed the Han to excel.

However, neither Rome nor the Han had the capability to extend force to all the quadrants of the world, even if you limit the definition of "the world" to the world they knew. Both Rome and the Han built walls (Great Wall, Hadrians Wall) to defend borders they could not extend. Rome could cross the Rhine under extraordinary circumstances, but couldn't make any lasting penetration. The Han certainly knew of Japan, and the Romans certainly knew of Ireland, but neither had the capacity to invade.
Back to Top
Joe Boxer View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 30-Jun-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Joe Boxer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Jun-2007 at 17:36
1. You guys are a bit too Eurocentric. Rome a hyperpower?
 
What about:
Han Empire?
Mauryan Empire?
Carthaginian Empire?
Gupta Empire?
 
How about the fear of Europe and the Destroyers of the Roman-Byzantium empire?
 
Ottoman Empire. They were around for 600+ years, never conquered from outside, revolution from inside. "The scourge of God because of your sins" wrote one Christian intellectual when Byzantine fell.
 
2. By the way the Parthian Empire and the Sassanid Empire were constantly in a state of challenge with Rome. Also, i wouldnt call Alexander an empire builder; rather a conquerer. His "empire" was as long as he stayed alive. Rather the Greek culture diffused widely from North Africa to India.
 
3. Also, it is a peculiar thing that these "Hyperpowers" remained Hyper for a small amount of time. For example when the Sassanid Empire defeated Heracles the Byzantine king, they gained about 40% of Byzantine's territory; but only held it for 9 years.
 
In another sense, the Empire of the United States only reached hyper status after 1989. But for how long? Until 2009? {China}.
 
4. Also, people cant decide how strong Russia is in comparison to the US; and some of you are discussing military capabilties. Lets just remember that this is a very dynamic affair. There is more than one way to destroy a nation/enemy. China could just as easily sell off all of its US Dollar assets right now, plunging the nation into a selling frenzy. There goes the neighborhood.
 
China might not be on par with the military technology; but it does have the manpower. They can afford to lose 300,000,000 people on the battle field - the size of America.
 
Look at it this way. A bunch of tribal cave dwellers are running around with bazooka's slung over their backs. They are challenging the American Empire. And America is having trouble keeping them contained/finishing them off.
 
Just to show you how economically/technologically insignificant; but determined an enemy has to be to give you trouble.
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.