The Largest Empires in History?? - Page 4 - Historum

čarević · August 18th, 2012, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank81

Considering sea power British Empire was a superb military power. People tend to forget that military isn't only land warfare.

Spaniards also were a noticeable sea power.

But territories under dominion of a certain Empire are seen in-land, and this is depicted in the maps.

čarević · August 18th, 2012, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guaporense

There is also the fact that we do not really know the actual territories of ancient and medieval empires. The dimensions given are usually rough estimates that tend to exaggerate the real sizes of ancient and medieval empires.

I've to agree on this.

čarević · August 18th, 2012, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guaporense

The Roman Empire was smaller because "the world" was smaller at that time. The territories outside of the Roman Empire were considered to not be part of the civilized world but only barbarian wastelands. The world that mattered, the cities, culture and civilization, were fully contained inside the borders of the Roman Empire (note that China wasn't part of the Roman world and thus did not really exist from the point of view of Rome).

And yet they were wrong, because barbarians were just their enemy doesn't qualify them as being none in the ancient world. Obviously the rulers of an Empire cared about their administration, and not about other civilization that would spoil their chance to rule, reason why they used to submit them and annex the territories to theirs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guaporense

The Roman Empire dominated 100% of the ancient world for 600 years...

As Ajax_Minoan had said, this isn't true. They didn't dominated 100% of the ancient world.

čarević · August 18th, 2012, 03:05 PM

Take a look at this map, the extent of land under Mongols cannot be compared.

Ajax_Minoan · August 18th, 2012, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by čarević

In terms of population and land actually occupied by people the Mongols are completely the winners in this qualification.

It’s true, but take into account the north of Euro-Asia, Siberia and the like territories, were almost not inhabited, because of the harsh climate to deal with. This territories would also be counted as Mongol Empire because the opposition of the low portion of people living there wouldn’t had be much. I don’t know why the northern lands aren’t shown in possession of Mongols in modern maps, maybe it’s because they weren’t interested in those territories. Russians had placed frontiers to mark their lands, even when not using the terrain of eastern Siberia that much. Mongols weren’t, besides there wasn’t any real menace that could strike them from the north when they were ruling.

Because Mongols doesn’t intended to use those lands, lands that represented no threat to their Empire. They lived in and used the steppes to move and raid with all the haste, the woods in the north wouldn’t helped that much to that cause.

Russians had taken the north later, and during CCCP they started using Siberia, i.e., as an industrial zone.

Yeah, I felt kind of lame giving Russia credit for tundra – lol. China being conquered by nomadic barbarians is just obscene. How did this happen.