10 empires that came close to world ?

13

Comments

  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    It's honestly pathetic how you backtracked on admitting you are wrong and now quoting a book you have no knowledge of haven't even read a page of to win a arguement. You don't even know if it's a reliable source or not. I actually talk to the people who study history and are at the forefront. Your a phony intellectual who best friend is Google lol.

    Lol, and historians continue to say the Mongol Empire was the 2nd largest of all time. But anyway.....

    Did Kublai Khan have an empire in Asia? Yes or no? Remember now, he had full control of China, Mongolia, and Korea, along with some other areas. Let's see if we can at least agree on that.



  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zzombie wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    So all that only to admit you were wrong. But I'm the Internet amateur smh

    How am I wrong? Historians still consider the Mongolian Empire, an empire lol....Kublai Khan consolidated most of the empire under one rule, and even though various Khans still had feuds, MOST of the empire was under control of one man under his rule. I said from the beginning the Mongolian Empire was a legit one, while you were saying all sorts of gibberish before that historians would laugh at.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan

    In 1271, Kublai established the Yuan dynasty, which ruled over present-day Mongolia, China, Korea, and some adjacent areas, and assumed the role of Emperor of China. By 1279, the Yuan forces had overcome the last resistance of the Southern Song dynasty, and Kublai became the first non-native Emperor to conquer all of China.

    This only proves that the mongols under kublai were the rulers of asia not that there was consolidation of the mongol empire.

    Let's leave the Golden Horde and the other Khanates out of this for a second and just mention Kublai Khan.....

    Is it fair to say Kublai Khan had his own empire when he had Mongolia, Korea, and all of China?
  • zzombie
    zzombie Members Posts: 11,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2016
    Ajackson17 wrote: »
    You forgotten they had control of a huge chunk of western asia, Russia and other slavic nations. They were ? vast, but Kublai Khan had control of only Eastern Asia.

    It's not called the Kublai Khan empire or even the Genghis Khan empire, notice historians refer to it as the MONGOLIAN EMPIRE. The empire was founded by Genghis, and continued on through his sons and ancestors. Yes Kublai didn't have TOTAL control of the empire, but Genghis Khan's relatives and associates controlled the parts you mentioned.

    The Khans had their feuds, but they all claimed to be doing the will of Genghis Khan. This is why historians from Asia to the Americas call the Mongolian Empire, an empire. Colleges and historians around the world would laugh at all the amateur talk going on around here.

    It's a misnomer and simplification for lay people or the uneducated.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You don't know what your talking about. Even if they claimed to be all doing his will if they are fueding and not unified it's not an empire. FACT. By definition it's not an empire. It's really sad how wrong youbare. I acknowledge that Genghis had an empire. After genhis kublqi had control but was still contested. If you actual read and have knowledge on the subject Mayan rebellion among other(Wikipedia it since you have no knowledge on it lol)

    After that there was no united empire.

    Your almost as uneducated as your are arrogant and wrong
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    See you have nothing to say about you admitting that the after his death there was no empire. Most likely saw conflicting Google articles right lol. I know you don't actually know about the subject yet act like you do.
  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zzombie wrote: »
    Ajackson17 wrote: »
    You forgotten they had control of a huge chunk of western asia, Russia and other slavic nations. They were ? vast, but Kublai Khan had control of only Eastern Asia.

    It's not called the Kublai Khan empire or even the Genghis Khan empire, notice historians refer to it as the MONGOLIAN EMPIRE. The empire was founded by Genghis, and continued on through his sons and ancestors. Yes Kublai didn't have TOTAL control of the empire, but Genghis Khan's relatives and associates controlled the parts you mentioned.

    The Khans had their feuds, but they all claimed to be doing the will of Genghis Khan. This is why historians from Asia to the Americas call the Mongolian Empire, an empire. Colleges and historians around the world would laugh at all the amateur talk going on around here.

    It's a misnomer and simplification for lay people or the uneducated.

    Nonetheless, it's fair to say Kublai Khan had a very impressive empire in his hands, one he inherited from Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan helped birth several dynasties that changed the world, whether unified or not.

    Few families in history have created as many military and political dynasties as Genghis Khan and his ancestors have.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I don't get what you don't understand I say after Genghis but I'll give and say after kublai there was no empire. No unification no empire
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zzombie wrote: »
    Ajackson17 wrote: »
    You forgotten they had control of a huge chunk of western asia, Russia and other slavic nations. They were ? vast, but Kublai Khan had control of only Eastern Asia.

    It's not called the Kublai Khan empire or even the Genghis Khan empire, notice historians refer to it as the MONGOLIAN EMPIRE. The empire was founded by Genghis, and continued on through his sons and ancestors. Yes Kublai didn't have TOTAL control of the empire, but Genghis Khan's relatives and associates controlled the parts you mentioned.

    The Khans had their feuds, but they all claimed to be doing the will of Genghis Khan. This is why historians from Asia to the Americas call the Mongolian Empire, an empire. Colleges and historians around the world would laugh at all the amateur talk going on around here.

    It's a misnomer and simplification for lay people or the uneducated.

    Nonetheless, it's fair to say Kublai Khan had a very impressive empire in his hands, one he inherited from Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan helped birth several dynasties that changed the world, whether unified or not.

    Few families in history have created as many military and political dynasties as Genghis Khan and his ancestors have.

    Still doesn't change the fact it wasn't a empire. Nobody saying they weren't influential just wasn't an empire.
  • reapin505
    reapin505 Members Posts: 4,009 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Bout to gave my bachelor in early western civilizations so get that amateur shot out here

    You trying to be a professor or something? What would be the job prospects besides teaching with a degree in that?
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2016
    reapin505 wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Bout to gave my bachelor in early western civilizations so get that amateur shot out here

    You trying to be a professor or something? What would be the job prospects besides teaching with a degree in that?

    That's what I plan on doing. Right now in jersey I'm a licensed gun dealer, currently in the army hoping to get a deployment and make a little bit on the side with amateur boxing. When I'm in the later years of my life (24 now) I just want a peaceful quiet life.

    But there are alot of other prospects if you get enough acclaim guest speaking, if you are a well thought out writer can make multimillion on book deals, can work at some of the most prestigious museums. There is alot of work out there and I love the early civilization history and planning on getting a master's in philosophy and literature. Army pays for it all so why not
  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2016
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    zzombie wrote: »
    Ajackson17 wrote: »
    You forgotten they had control of a huge chunk of western asia, Russia and other slavic nations. They were ? vast, but Kublai Khan had control of only Eastern Asia.

    It's not called the Kublai Khan empire or even the Genghis Khan empire, notice historians refer to it as the MONGOLIAN EMPIRE. The empire was founded by Genghis, and continued on through his sons and ancestors. Yes Kublai didn't have TOTAL control of the empire, but Genghis Khan's relatives and associates controlled the parts you mentioned.

    The Khans had their feuds, but they all claimed to be doing the will of Genghis Khan. This is why historians from Asia to the Americas call the Mongolian Empire, an empire. Colleges and historians around the world would laugh at all the amateur talk going on around here.

    It's a misnomer and simplification for lay people or the uneducated.

    Nonetheless, it's fair to say Kublai Khan had a very impressive empire in his hands, one he inherited from Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan helped birth several dynasties that changed the world, whether unified or not.

    Few families in history have created as many military and political dynasties as Genghis Khan and his ancestors have.

    Still doesn't change the fact it wasn't a empire. Nobody saying they weren't influential just wasn't an empire.

    Well you've acknowledged that Kublai Khan had his empire on top of what Genghis had. The Golden Horde had its own empire, and the other ancestors of Genghis Khan made their own empires as well.

    Just taking Kublai Khan's land, that empire alone is one of the most incredible in history.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    zzombie wrote: »
    Ajackson17 wrote: »
    You forgotten they had control of a huge chunk of western asia, Russia and other slavic nations. They were ? vast, but Kublai Khan had control of only Eastern Asia.

    It's not called the Kublai Khan empire or even the Genghis Khan empire, notice historians refer to it as the MONGOLIAN EMPIRE. The empire was founded by Genghis, and continued on through his sons and ancestors. Yes Kublai didn't have TOTAL control of the empire, but Genghis Khan's relatives and associates controlled the parts you mentioned.

    The Khans had their feuds, but they all claimed to be doing the will of Genghis Khan. This is why historians from Asia to the Americas call the Mongolian Empire, an empire. Colleges and historians around the world would laugh at all the amateur talk going on around here.

    It's a misnomer and simplification for lay people or the uneducated.

    Nonetheless, it's fair to say Kublai Khan had a very impressive empire in his hands, one he inherited from Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan helped birth several dynasties that changed the world, whether unified or not.

    Few families in history have created as many military and political dynasties as Genghis Khan and his ancestors have.

    Still doesn't change the fact it wasn't a empire. Nobody saying they weren't influential just wasn't an empire.

    Well you've acknowledged that Kublai Khan had his empire on top of what Genghis had. The Golden Horde had its own empire, and the other ancestors of Genghis Khan made their own empires as well.

    Just taking Kublai Khan's land, that empire alone would be one of the most incredible in history.

    I said I'll give leeway I personal wouldn't even classify his rein as an complete empire since some of his brothers in essence "owned" part of his land.

    Lol you continue to prove my point. The Golden Horde peaked after what is considered the offical division of the "empire"(which I use loosely). I mean they even adopted Turkish customs and we're considered a turk khanates.

    Genghis was impressive as ? and Kublai was also to an extent but the "empire" wasn't impressive in that it didn't have any longevity. The mongols khanates lasted a while and we're strong but they were overall the own individual provinces in reality.
  • reapin505
    reapin505 Members Posts: 4,009 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    reapin505 wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Bout to gave my bachelor in early western civilizations so get that amateur shot out here

    You trying to be a professor or something? What would be the job prospects besides teaching with a degree in that?

    That's what I plan on doing. Right now in jersey I'm a licensed gun dealer, currently in the army hoping to get a deployment and make a little bit on the side with amateur boxing. When I'm in the later years of my life (24 now) I just want a peaceful quiet life.

    But there are alot of other prospects if you get enough acclaim guest speaking, if you are a well thought out writer can make multimillion on book deals, can work at some of the most prestigious museums. There is alot of work out there and I love the early civilization history and planning on getting a master's in philosophy and literature. Army pays for it all so why not

    Yeah I need to the military rout again and actually not trip at the starting line at meps again lol. History has always been a big passion for me, but there isn't much to do with that degree here in boring ass New Mexico. The Classical, Roman, and the "Dark Ages" have got to be some of my favorite periods in history.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2016
    reapin505 wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    reapin505 wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Bout to gave my bachelor in early western civilizations so get that amateur shot out here

    You trying to be a professor or something? What would be the job prospects besides teaching with a degree in that?

    That's what I plan on doing. Right now in jersey I'm a licensed gun dealer, currently in the army hoping to get a deployment and make a little bit on the side with amateur boxing. When I'm in the later years of my life (24 now) I just want a peaceful quiet life.

    But there are alot of other prospects if you get enough acclaim guest speaking, if you are a well thought out writer can make multimillion on book deals, can work at some of the most prestigious museums. There is alot of work out there and I love the early civilization history and planning on getting a master's in philosophy and literature. Army pays for it all so why not

    Yeah I need to the military rout again and actually not trip at the starting line at meps again lol. History has always been a big passion for me, but there isn't much to do with that degree here in boring ass New Mexico. The Classical, Roman, and the "Dark Ages" have got to be some of my favorite periods in history.

    Get out of new Mexico if job prospects aren't good enough. And same have a strong interest in Roman history and "Dark Ages". Also really like byzantine empire and various kingdoms in African. To me it's worth it. As far as the army I tell everyone I know who thinking about it do it. It's honestly fun when it's not ? lmao. And it's worth it benefits lifelong friendsships and can meet powerful connections. I know for a fact if it wasn't for the army college would put me in a deep hole ? that

    I am glad that "dark ages" is now starting to be replaced with middle ages. It's extremely arrogant to think the whole world was plunged in darkness and despair just because Rome fell. The myth that it was a time of book burning and mass killing of scientists in particular ? me of because it literally takes an hour to quickly study the subject and get a general idea. I honestly blame family guy and the sheep that just believes it.
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Haven't read through the thread yet, but based on the title, there's the Mongols and then everybody else.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2016
    mryounggun wrote: »
    Haven't read through the thread yet, but based on the title, there's the Mongols and then everybody else.

    Read through you'll see why the mongols weren't an empire. Not to disregard there achievement but after genghis death it was more a very very loose federation or more likely to describe it a confedrate with no specific central authority or government. The only empire that realistically had a chance at conquering the world was the British
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    Haven't read through the thread yet, but based on the title, there's the Mongols and then everybody else.

    Read through you'll see why the mongols weren't an empire. Not to disregard there achievement but after genghis death it was more a very very loose federation or more likely to describe it a confedrate with no specific central authority or government. The only empire that realistically had a chance at conquering the world was the British

    An empire is defined as an extensive group of states or countries under a single supreme authority. That fits the Mongols to a T. Even if we just consider up to the point of GK's death - hell, ESPECIALLY if ew just consider that time frame - they still qualify.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    mryounggun wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    Haven't read through the thread yet, but based on the title, there's the Mongols and then everybody else.

    Read through you'll see why the mongols weren't an empire. Not to disregard there achievement but after genghis death it was more a very very loose federation or more likely to describe it a confedrate with no specific central authority or government. The only empire that realistically had a chance at conquering the world was the British

    An empire is defined as an extensive group of states or countries under a single supreme authority. That fits the Mongols to a T. Even if we just consider up to the point of GK's death - hell, ESPECIALLY if ew just consider that time frame - they still qualify.

    That's what I agree to. That it was an empire up to GK death but after that and the khanates split up the territory and there was no single supreme authority it stopped being one. I'll even say it was one up until Kublai death(even though his brothers "owned" certain areas) but as soon as he dies and each khanates claims their own area and proclaimed themselves ruler of there section it stops being one.

    I see it as being the literally same as the Holy Roman Empire.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Whay do you think about the lost. Personally I think it's pretty ? but want to hear others opinions
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    Haven't read through the thread yet, but based on the title, there's the Mongols and then everybody else.

    Read through you'll see why the mongols weren't an empire. Not to disregard there achievement but after genghis death it was more a very very loose federation or more likely to describe it a confedrate with no specific central authority or government. The only empire that realistically had a chance at conquering the world was the British

    An empire is defined as an extensive group of states or countries under a single supreme authority. That fits the Mongols to a T. Even if we just consider up to the point of GK's death - hell, ESPECIALLY if ew just consider that time frame - they still qualify.

    That's what I agree to. That it was an empire up to GK death but after that and the khanates split up the territory and there was no single supreme authority it stopped being one. I'll even say it was one up until Kublai death(even though his brothers "owned" certain areas) but as soon as he dies and each khanates claims their own area and proclaimed themselves ruler of there section it stops being one.

    I see it as being the literally same as the Holy Roman Empire.

    Cool. Everything you said in this post is true. So...the Mongol Empire was the closest to world ? then. Lol.
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Whay do you think about the lost. Personally I think it's pretty ? but want to hear others opinions


    Dunno what you mean.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2016
    mryounggun wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Whay do you think about the lost. Personally I think it's pretty ? but want to hear others opinions


    Dunno what you mean.

    My bad on mobile what do you think about the list. Personally I say British were closer to world ? . Logistically speaking no way Mongols could have kept continue to expandable. To be fair its not like the majority of empires sought world dominate beside them, British, and debatably Roman.

    I don't really like classifying it as an empire I mean I expect a little longevity but by definition if we strictly say that whikle GK was alive it was an empire and after his death it stopped being so I cant argue against it.
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Whay do you think about the lost. Personally I think it's pretty ? but want to hear others opinions


    Dunno what you mean.

    My bad on mobile what do you think about the list. Personally I say British were closer to world ? . Logistically speaking no way Mongols could have kept continue to expandable. To be fair its not like the majority of empires sought world dominate beside them, British, and debatably Roman.

    Ah. Gotcha. I'm not really looking at it like that. I'm more looking at it like who's empire controlled more of the known world at the time. I'm not really taking into consideration the logistics of projecting being able or not being able to continue conquering other people and places. I'm just looking at what actually took place.

    I could be wrong (doubt it), but I'm pretty sure the Mongols controlled more of he known world at their height than the British did at their height.
  • The_Jackal
    The_Jackal Members Posts: 3,628 ✭✭✭✭✭
    mryounggun wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    The_Jackal wrote: »
    Whay do you think about the lost. Personally I think it's pretty ? but want to hear others opinions


    Dunno what you mean.

    My bad on mobile what do you think about the list. Personally I say British were closer to world ? . Logistically speaking no way Mongols could have kept continue to expandable. To be fair its not like the majority of empires sought world dominate beside them, British, and debatably Roman.

    Ah. Gotcha. I'm not really looking at it like that. I'm more looking at it like who's empire controlled more of the known world at the time. I'm not really taking into consideration the logistics of projecting being able or not being able to continue conquering other people and places. I'm just looking at what actually took place.

    I could be wrong (doubt it), but I'm pretty sure the Mongols controlled more of he known world at their height than the British did at their height.

    I wouldn't beable to say off hand since British owned colonies throughout African, had Australia, and had North America and Canada. I don't know exactly how much that would be landmass wise.

    And I can understand it from your viewpoint just from the video premise it seemed to imply who actually had the ability to control the world regardless of how much land they actually controlled. I mean why else would they have America on the list.