Strongest Empires by timeline

[Ottoman-Turk]

lol thats true nobody has mongol culture now or they had no civilization

 

[World_Peace]

Overall I think the best 2 empires in history have been the Mongols and the British. These 2 managed to grab land more than anyother, and kept it for a good while, while also imposing their language and culture on others. Success I say, lol

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[World_Peace]

The Roman civilisation was powerful amongst the countries surrounding it. I doubt it could have won against the massive armies fielded by the Indian and Chinese kingdoms.

Buddy you should know that the roman army was one of the most disciplined.Yea the Indian kings could have troubled them a bit however they would have been victorious cause of better technology with them.Just think if they weren't near Mediterranean but lived near us then??

 

[World_Peace]

You see, outsides might think otherwise, but once Islam came, and Punjab and Sindh accepted it, we (I'm Punjabi) no longer though of the Muslim rulers as outsides or foreign people who are imposing their rule on us, they technically became our people or should I say we became theirs

Such words can be spoken by only those who value their freedom very lightly.When US fought for independence from the English both were Christians.By your analogy if Iran conquers KSA or vice versa would the enslaved people live happily?Freedom and liberty are among the most cherished human traits no matter which religion you belong to!

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Can you elaborate on how or who accepted mongol civilization?

Turkic cultures, if I'm not mistaken, takes alot from Mongol culture.

Khans. They're everywhere, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, Bangladesh, West Asian "Stans". Where does this khan title (or surname as it is today) come from?

Such words can be spoken by only those who value their freedom very lightly.When US fought for independence from the English both were Christians.By your analogy if Iran conquers KSA or vice versa would the enslaved people live happily?Freedom and liberty are among the most cherished human traits no matter which religion you belong to!

That's what I'm saying bro, in general the only ones that rebelled against the foreign Muslim invaders were you (no offence) Hindus and Sikhs. Call it wanting freedom or whatever, point is us Muslims didn't feel like our freedom was taken, and as I said, we essentially became one of them.

Don't compare us with the US, also the Saudi Arabians won't be happy because Iran is "Shia".

 

[World_Peace]

Turkic cultures, if I'm not mistaken, takes alot from Mongol culture.

Khans. They're everywhere, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, Bangladesh, West Asian "Stans". Where does this khan title (or surname as it is today) come from?



That's what I'm saying bro, in general the only ones that rebelled against the foreign Muslim invaders were you (no offence) Hindus and Sikhs. Call it wanting freedom or whatever, point is us Muslims didn't feel like our freedom was taken, and as I said, we essentially became one of them.

Don't compare us with the US, also the Saudi Arabians won't be happy because Iran is "Shia".

Apart from surnames I don't think they have left anything.For the Turkish part I think some one from turkey could spread light on that.


Secondly i am not offended by any views by anybody because everyone has their POV.Coming to the point actually south India where I belong to never came under Muslim rule.Although our state was a proxy under the British still I feel we were under their rule so we were not having freedom.Maybe you have your own POV about freedom and you are always welcome to keep yours.
Moreover why can't I compare with US.Of KSA and Iran I said so because at the end of the day both are Islamic countries.Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Moreover why can't I compare with US.Of KSA and Iran I said so because at the end of the day both are Islamic countries.Correct me if I am wrong.

Reason you can't compare the Subcontinental Muslims and Muslim Conquerors to USA and Brit. Emp. is because the USA was essentially a colony to the UK whereas the Subcontinent became the home for these "invaders" later on.

For example the, they extracted all resources and invested them within the Subcontinent whereas the Brits extracted American resources and (largely) used them back home in Britain. I know it's not the best example lol, but just to give you an idea

 

[Birbal]

Buddy you should know that the roman army was one of the most disciplined.Yea the Indian kings could have troubled them a bit however they would have been victorious cause of better technology with them.Just think if they weren't near Mediterranean but lived near us then??

The Indian armies of the Mauryan and Gupta empires were also quite disciplined. And the Romans did held little if any technological advantage over them.

I'd love to see the ancient Roman army deal with several thousand elephants.

It's a little harder to compare the Chinese to the Romans. Technologically, China was nearly always superior to anyone else, but to what extent it was able to put its technology to good practical use is an open question.

Reason you can't compare the Subcontinental Muslims and Muslim Conquerors to USA and Brit. Emp. is because the USA was essentially a colony to the UK whereas the Subcontinent became the home for these "invaders" later on.

For example the, they extracted all resources and invested them within the Subcontinent whereas the Brits extracted American resources and (largely) used them back home in Britain. I know it's not the best example lol, but just to give you an idea

Well it depends on the Muslim conquerors. There were those who decided to establish empires in the subcontinent and elsewhere and there were those who just wanted to loot.

Interestingly, many of the early English colonists also intended merely to establish their own administrations in India. It wasn't until the 1800s that they started looting India.

 

[Yeti]

Genghis Khan nothing else compares to him

 

[Yeti]

after that my fave is the Chola dynasty

 

[World_Peace]

The Indian armies of the Mauryan and Gupta empires were also quite disciplined. And the Romans did held little if any technological advantage over them.

I'd love to see the ancient Roman army deal with several thousand elephants.

It's a little harder to compare the Chinese to the Romans. Technologically, China was nearly always superior to anyone else, but to what extent it was able to put its technology to good practical use is an open question.

Well speaking about elephants perhaps you have heard abut Hannibal and his army of elephants.They got thrashed and by the third Punic war the Carthagians were made to bite the dust by the Romans.

 

[forummurat]

According my opinion Ottoman Empire are the most successful empire in the history..
Because Ottomans estabished a great empire and civilisation although strong enemies in the area that 3-4 times the crowd.. (Russia, England, France, Spain, Italy, Iran and various others)
And usually although the continuous war status..!
The war such that sometimes against 3-4 great state at the same time..!!!
This is a great power.. Today USA can not dare to fought with another country after Afghanistan and Iraq..!

 

[500]

Egypt
Assiria
Babylon
Persia
Macedonia
Rome
Arabs (Ummeyads, early Abbasides)
China (Tang, Song)
Mongols
China (Ming)
Ottomans 1520-1648
France 1648 - 1714
UK 1714 - 1914
USA

 

[forummurat]

Ottomans 1520-1648

You are very measly..
Are you jeweler?

 

[Serpentine]

From 500 BC to 600 AD Persia (First alone but then along with Romans) was the most powerful empire in the world.(I didn't mention the short period of Alexander rule in Macedonia)
Just to mention,i can't personally consider Mongols as an empire,they were some savages who didn't do anything for humanity except killing,destroying and burning anyone and anything,anywhere they reached.