The most influential Empire in the history of mankind?

[Rolf]

What do you believe was the most influential Empire? Asks Rolf. Post your reasons behind your choice. Note: Soviet Union and USA were/are not empires, adds Rolf.

Rolf believes that it was the Roman Empire, for the following reasons:

1. Lasted for about 1500 years, (27 BCE - 1453 CE).
2. Had significant linguistic influence on European languages that succeeded it, Latin alphabet continues to be the world's most widespread alphabet. Cyrillic, another extremely widespread alphabet, was founded in the Roman Empire.
3. Roman architecture influenced European architecture, especially neoclassical architecture.
4. Helped spread Christianity throughout most of Europe (not including Armenia, which was the first nation to adopt Christianity).
5. Modern law is based on principles from Roman law.
6. Modern military organization and structure is based on that of the Romans.
7. It's fall caused Greco-Roman scholars, sciences and arts to flee to Italy, starting the Renaissance.

Lists, Rolf.

[is all mememememe with me]

cause chris barrie's a fucking legend

[Oct]

1st and 3rd Reich

[p6867]

British empire, no question. It did more to impose western culture, capitalism and christianity on more people than any other empire can say for their empire. the demographic shift that the brits excelled at where, "Oh you don't want to work on our tea plantations ceylons or fijians? Just want to relax in your tropical paradise? How about we bring about 5 million tamils in here from india to become the majority on your islands? Boom. Done."

The brilliant way the played one tribe against the other for centuries and still has them killing each other now (Machete season anyone?), shipping Indians to go fight their unruly africans and africans to go fight their unruly indians. The way they collapsed China under addiction and rebellion. A world held at gun point by an island.
Founding a colony that goes on to dominate it's continent, hemisphere and back your interests and largely destroy your competition in every facet of national life, war, diplomacy and business, all over the world.
The british empire "modernized" the world and still hasn't stopped, just changed the face of its business.

And Octovia, seriously? 1st and 3rd reich? The 1st lacked even the longevity and influence of the Spanish empire and the only lasting influence the 3rd had is the creation of isreal which fucked things up a bit and making militarism a bad word, so now the only conquerors left in the 1st world are business types, which is why the brits had to change the face of their business. The USSR had about 10 times the influence the 3rd reich did.

[Cory]

In order:

1. Roman Empire (reasons stated)
2. British Empire (same)
3. Spanish Empire (the conquest of South America and establishing Christian culture there)

[p6867]

Originally Posted by Cory

In order:

1. Roman Empire (reasons stated)
2. British Empire (same)
3. Spanish Empire (the conquest of South America and establishing Christian culture there)

I switch 2 for 1 and agree with you. France and spain are pretty evenly matched.

[ChargerCarl]

Roman followed by British no question in my mind.

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by Rolf

7. It's fall caused Greco-Roman scholars, sciences and arts to flee to Italy, starting the Renaissance.

Actually the death of the Roman Empire is considered the beginning of the Dark Ages.

[Lanny]

I don't know if you consider classical Greece an empire (being city-states and all), but I consider them more scientifically and culturally significant than the Romans and British. Although if you include the modern history of Britain, I'd move them to the top.

[The Pat-Man]

I'm going with rome first for obvious reasons (civilization)

But the ottoman empire at it's height was pretty impressive too.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by The Pat-Man

But the ottoman empire at it's height was pretty impressive too.

Yeah this I forgot to include the Ottomans as number 4.

[Tachosomoza]

1.) British
2.) Roman
3.) Spanish
4.) Ottoman

[Lucid]

Shocked and awed there hasn't been one braindead fuck to come in here and say America yet, lol.

[ilovechronic]

Originally Posted by Lucid

Shocked and awed there hasn't been one braindead fuck to come in here and say USA yet, lol.

The US is is pretty influential these days but still an infant that could have sudden infant death syndrome at anytime.

I don't know though in some ways we have had major influence on the world. We are in many fucking countries. We made the first nuke. We have sucked a shit load of finite resources out of the world. We have a bat shit crazy capitalistic influence on the world. The brits may have started the capitalistic influence but we fucking took it and mastered it. have one of the most powerful conventional military's known to human history. Just nukes alone have had a major influence on the world and completely changed the world as it was known when the nukes were discovered and dropped. And then capitalism, that really has changed the world in a very fucking negative way.
But if people are basing it on time then we don't have shit. IMO time really doesn't matter, US has had some pretty fucking crazy influence on this world

[Tachosomoza]

We never really colonized anything except a bunch of islands in the Pacific. We could have annexed Mexico, but they didn't want a bunch of brown people stirring shit up.

[La Paz]

US has a lot of colonies by corporate proxy, an economic empire as much as a military one

[ilovechronic]

Originally Posted by La Paz

US has a lot of colonies by corporate proxy, an economic empire as much as a military one

This.

Also, we did all this shit in a FAR shorter amount of time than any other listed empire ITT.

When I say we I just mean the US because I live here, I don't agree with most of the shit that goes on TBH.

[The Explanation]

I'm surprised no one included the Mongols. I wouldn't consider them influential to western cultrure, but influential nontheless.

I like the Greeks though. If you can count them as an empire at all, I think they are the most influential. The Romans basically stole their culture from them, and it still pervades all of western society. So I suppose if you don't count Greece as an empire, then the Romans are the most influential. I think among all factors, culture is the most important in terms of a lasting impact, as technologies can merely be re-discovered and/or improved upon. eg. if Bell hadn't invented the telephone, someone else would have.

[Rolf]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

Actually the death of the Roman Empire is considered the beginning of the Dark Ages.

The fall of the Western Roman Empire is considered the start of the Early Middle Ages, well-known by many by it's Victorian term "Dark Ages", which is in fact reflective of the lack of texts from this age and not the lack of development, notes Rolf. Of course, when people say "Dark Ages" they forget the Eastern Roman Empire and the Carolingian Empire, adds Rolf.

Originally Posted by Lanny

I don't know if you consider classical Greece an empire (being city-states and all), but I consider them more scientifically and culturally significant than the Romans and British. Although if you include the modern history of Britain, I'd move them to the top.

The Ancient Greeks were one of the primary cultural ancestors of European culture; much of Western philosophy descends from the Ancient Greeks, proclaims Rolf. However, many ignore the amount of influence that Christianity had on European culture and while Christianity's origins are not Roman itself, Christianity became widespread in Europe due to Roman influence and dominance over other cultures, explains Rolf. In terms of Science, the Greeks are severely overstated, notes Rolf. Much of modern science, especially Mathematics and Chemistry, arrived in Europe through the Arabs, who themselves obtained it from Persia, India or China, notes Rolf.

Because of the Great Schism, it is culturally Orthodox states that have had more Greek influence than culturally Catholic (and it's protestant descendants) states, notes Rolf. The fact that the Eastern Roman Empire remained Orthodox is the main reason as to why contemporary Western states (and many contemporary and more modern Western historians) did not consider them Roman, sometimes calling the Carolingian Empire the successor state because the pope put a crown on Charlemagne's head, proclaims Rolf.

Originally Posted by Ond

Its*, notes Ond

Forgot full stop, notes Rolf.

Originally Posted by Cory

Yeah this I forgot to include the Ottomans as number 4.

The greatest legacy of the Ottoman Empire is being the primary cause for balkanization, proclaims Rolf. While significant in size and longevity, the Ottoman's influence on it's descendants is not as significant as say, the Spanish, Egyptian, Russian, British and Romans (east and west), explains Rolf. Even their direct cultural descendant has been trying to portray itself as European instead of Asian, notes Rolf.

Originally Posted by ilovechronic

This.

Also, we did all this shit in a FAR shorter amount of time than any other listed empire ITT.

Partially because of technological advancements by the time that the USA became one of the two world superpowers and because secondly the rest of the world had destroyed itself and it's infrastructure significantly in one of it's typical mass-murdering matches, after doing the same thing several decades earlier, proclaims Rolf.

Originally Posted by The Explanation

I'm surprised no one included the Mongols. I wouldn't consider them influential to western cultrure, but influential nontheless.

What stopped the Mongols reaching Western Europe was primarily all the issues they had with the Muslims and the Eastern European states combined with infighting and such, explains Rolf. Culturally speaking, the Mongols were a barbarian tribe that dominated other major cultures and eventually adopted those cultures, in a similar fashion to the Turks (whose culture was primarily Persian) and the Franks (whose culture was primarily Roman), proclaims Rolf.

[is all mememememe with me]

Originally Posted by Lucid

Shocked and awed there hasn't been one braindead fuck to come in here and say America yet, lol.

not being funny but america is way too isolationist to start an empire really. i'm surprised they took on peurto rico tbh.

[Rolf]

Originally Posted by is all mememememe with me

not being funny but america is way too isolationist to start an empire really. i'm surprised they took on peurto rico tbh.

Well, it has control of the UK and it's colonies... not that the UK together with it's colonies could truly be considered an empire any more, notes Rolf.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Rolf

The Ancient Greeks were one of the primary cultural ancestors of European culture; much of Western philosophy descends from the Ancient Greeks, proclaims Rolf. However, many ignore the amount of influence that Christianity had on European culture and while Christianity's origins are not Roman itself, Christianity became widespread in Europe due to Roman influence and dominance over other cultures, explains Rolf.

This is true, but Christianity wasn't an empire. And what's more is that as western culture becomes increasingly secular some (although not all, to be sure) of Christianity's influence is falling away.

In terms of Science, the Greeks are severely overstated, notes Rolf. Much of modern science, especially Mathematics and Chemistry, arrived in Europe through the Arabs, who themselves obtained it from Persia, India or China, notes Rolf.

While it's true that Greek mathematics are overrated, so are its Arab/Indian counterparts. Greece itself had significant exchange with those cultures and they developed some forms of mathematics in parallel. If we're talking about true modern mathematics though the USA and Germany have been the two largest contributors. Not to mention that aside from Turing and Babbage/Ada, computer science has been a thoroughly American development (I mention it because CS constitutes about half of all modern mathematics).

[Rolf]

Originally Posted by Lanny

This is true, but Christianity wasn't an empire. And what's more is that as western culture becomes increasingly secular some (although not all, to be sure) of Christianity's influence is falling away.

True, though Christian thought has so deeply influenced the Western mentality it would be foolish to ignore it's historical importance, even if one is irreligious, proclaims Rolf. Christian culture, while not an empire (not sure what you're trying to point out here, Greek philosophy and Arabic medicine were not empires either), has until very recently dominated all European peoples, proclaims Rolf. And yet still, religion remains heavily dominant in the largest Western country, adds Rolf.

Originally Posted by Lanny

While it's true that Greek mathematics are overrated, so are its Arab/Indian counterparts.

Considering that at least half of the English-speaking world doesn't know where the modern numeral system comes from, Rolf is inclined to disagree, is Rolf.

Originally Posted by Lanny

If we're talking about true modern mathematics though the USA and Germany have been the two largest contributors. Not to mention that aside from Turing and Babbage/Ada, computer science has been a thoroughly American development (I mention it because CS constitutes about half of all modern mathematics).

Computer science is a ridiculously young field when compared to it's older brothers and wouldn't exist without the earlier contributions from far earlier civilizations, proclaims Rolf. The difficulty with comparing young Civilizations with older ones, determining who was the most significant in history, states Rolf. The youngest Civilizations wouldn't exist without the older ones and many of their achievements, especially in regard to the British Empire, were significantly bolstered by the technology of the time, adds Rolf. Arguably it could be said that the Akkadian Empire was the most significant empire in history simply due to being the first recorded Empire in history, explains Rolf.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Rolf

Considering that at least half of the English-speaking world doesn't know where the modern numeral system comes from, Rolf is inclined to disagree, is Rolf.

You'd be surprised how many people acknowledge the Hindu-Arabic contribution to mathematics. It seems like every time I get into a conversation that strays near the history of mathematics someone feels inclined to leap in and try to show how smart they are. Pretentious assholes . And anyway, the Babylonians had developed a system of numeration that would operate entirely as efficiently as the one that came out of India. Actually, in light of some of limitations on our current system, we may have been better served by the Babylonian system.

Computer science is a ridiculously young field when compared to it's older brothers and wouldn't exist without the earlier contributions from far earlier civilizations, proclaims Rolf. The difficulty with comparing young Civilizations with older ones, determining who was the most significant in history, states Rolf.

Blasphemy! Computer science isn't that much younger than calculus, albeit in a somewhat primitive (although entirely recognizable) form. And if we take computer science as the study of algorithms then we can call it one of the older fields of mathematics, created more or less in parallel with algebra.

The youngest Civilizations wouldn't exist without the older ones and many of their achievements, especially in regard to the British Empire, were significantly bolstered by the technology of the time, adds Rolf. Arguably it could be said that the Akkadian Empire was the most significant empire in history simply due to being the first recorded Empire in history, explains Rolf.

Yes, obviously newer civilizations have technological advantages over their predecessors. I don't know why that would change how you measure their influence though. And we see that empires that are more technologically advanced don't always exert more influence than their more primitive counterparts. Compare the Roman and Ottoman empires.

[Rolf]

Originally Posted by Lanny

And if we take computer science as the study of algorithms then we can call it one of the older fields of mathematics, created more or less in parallel with algebra.

The dictionary has a different meaning for computer science, notes Rolf.

Originally Posted by Lanny

I don't know why that would change how you measure their influence though.

Technology is one of the biggest limitations on what civilizations can and cannot do, so naturally more modern ones have the advantage, states Rolf. Though Rolf will admit this is partially off-topic, adds Rolf.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Rolf

The dictionary has a different meaning for computer science, notes Rolf.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...uter%20science

a branch of science that deals with the theory of computation

Same difference. Its a common misconception that the existence of computer science is entirely dependent on electronic computers. In fact, we could have theoretically made every advancement in the field that we have without electricity. It just wouldn't be particularly useful. But either way, it's still at least the same age as calculus, which most people don't consider (and I might contend incorrectly, but that's another matter) a "young field".

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Ond

Is that right

You still didn't use a period.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Ond

I intentionally avoid punctuation sometimes; no one is forgetting anything
Reason being, if you're curious, terminating an interrogative sentence with a question mark leaves the impression that I'm more curious than I am.
You should take my punctuation as some indication of how I would speak the same words aloud.

So the solution is the leave the reader wondering how how you would have expressed it?

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Ond

All sarcastic sentences should be read in my voice, flowing from word to word with metronomic precision, never arriving at tonal completion

Hmm, I'm told you have a "really annoying, authoritative american accent". Is this true?

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Ond

Only when I want to. Here's a recent sample.

I see. Also, I now remember what I don't go on IRC.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Ond

You should use IRC, Lanny. How else are we supposed to brainstorm?

Well I actually do, I just avoid #totse because every time I go in there it's always logic and her, uhh, antics. Maybe I should get back into it though, I remember some interesting conversations I've had over the years.

[Communicate]

Originally Posted by p6867

British empire, no question. It did more to impose western culture, capitalism and christianity on more people than any other empire can say for their empire. the demographic shift that the brits excelled at where, "Oh you don't want to work on our tea plantations ceylons or fijians? Just want to relax in your tropical paradise? How about we bring about 5 million tamils in here from india to become the majority on your islands? Boom. Done."

Have to disagree man.
I think it's a geographic thing. For anybody living in europe (incl. britain), the british empire didn't mean shit. It's only the new world, and perhaps africa now, that was absolutely fundamentally changed by colonial empires.

But in another sense, even then, roman empire was a necessary foundation for the british empire, so roman empire still trumps in my mind.

Originally Posted by Lanny

I don't know if you consider classical Greece an empire (being city-states and all), but I consider them more scientifically and culturally significant than the Romans and British.

Nah that's bullshit.
The greeks were certainly fucking important, but not civilisation changers. The romans took influences but in a pragmatic way, and created the foundation for all european history. Ancient greece certainly has a lot more influence due to revival of it's thinkers in the enlightenment, which massively shaped the here and now, but I still think not more than the tangible shit we see from the roman and later european empires.

We should perhaps also consider mongolian empire, because I bet if we weren't so western centric we'd rightly see why it was such a big thing.

[Lanny]

Originally Posted by Communicate

Have to disagree man.
I think it's a geographic thing. For anybody living in europe (incl. britain), the british empire didn't mean shit. It's only the new world, and perhaps africa now, that was absolutely fundamentally changed by colonial empires.

But in another sense, even then, roman empire was a necessary foundation for the british empire, so roman empire still trumps in my mind.

Nah that's bullshit.
The greeks were certainly fucking important, but not civilisation changers. The romans took influences but in a pragmatic way, and created the foundation for all european history. Ancient greece certainly has a lot more influence due to revival of it's thinkers in the enlightenment, which massively shaped the here and now, but I still think not more than the tangible shit we see from the roman and later european empires.

We should perhaps also consider mongolian empire, because I bet if we weren't so western centric we'd rightly see why it was such a big thing.

So the Romans are more influential than the British because the former enabled the latter, but the Greeks are unimportant despite nearly every facet of Roman culture being directly inherited from Greece? Sorry, not buying it. Greek mathematics (while overstated, as Rolf pointed out ) are extremely important. As far as architecture and engineering goes, the Greeks laid the foundation (no pun intended) for pretty much every masonry or concrete structure to come. The span of the roman empire was pretty much a big hole in the history of engineering. While their military engineering was impressive, no real structural engineering progress until the fall of the western Roman empire, and only once again matched greek levels (of progress) in the late 19th/early 20th centuries.

[Communicate]

nah, the romans took a lot of aesthetic and behaviour from greece that is quite distinct from their impact upon history.
they were men of war, and then men of bureaucracy. the greek shit is just fluffer. etruscean at root, adopted bits of greeky shit, but it didn't affect what they did or how they did it.

but your point about advancement not catching up works to my point. they might have been advanced, very scientifically advanced and philosophically astute to the extent the west doesn't seem to rival, but that wasn't influential on the course of history. the mark of that, came through indirectly with the enlightenment.

[trustt]

The British .

[Yggdrasil]

Originally Posted by Ond

Only when I want to. Here's a recent sample.

Gaydar readings are strong with this one.

On topic, nothing that hasn't been mentioned before. Looking at the question from the point of view of their historical impact, it's a toss-up between the Romans and British, though I'm inclined to say the Romans moreso due to contributions to art, government, and general European culture and society.

Originally Posted by Communicate

I think it's a geographic thing. For anybody living in europe (incl. britain), the british empire didn't mean shit. It's only the new world, and perhaps africa now, that was absolutely fundamentally changed by colonial empires.

Well, that's bullshit. Some of the things that made the British Empire as significant as it was was its role in global politics, culture and technology. In the same way that the US has strongarmed global culture and politics for almost a century, the British Empire did so in the 19th century. I don't really see how you get off on making that kind of statement.

[Communicate]

Originally Posted by Yggdrasil

Well, that's bullshit. Some of the things that made the British Empire as significant as it was was its role in global politics, culture and technology. In the same way that the US has strongarmed global culture and politics for almost a century, the British Empire did so in the 19th century. I don't really see how you get off on making that kind of statement.

Right, but from my perspective (an insulated, european one), the british empire don't mean shit. The british empire is one result, meaningless to me, of the same processes which put me here and now saying this shit back.

Of course it was globally meaningful, but I think beneath the roman empire, because I think the people, society and historical development that constitutes *this*, would be so fucking far removed without that shit underneath it all, as the greatest historical influence.

I don't get off anywhere making statements, I'm along for the journey.

[Rolf]

Basically, Rolf views the Romans as the best example due to the fact that they weren't a culture focused entirely on cultural development (such as the Greeks except for that Alexander guy) but they were also not a culture focused entirely on militaristic expansion (Mongols, Huns, for example), states Rolf. Roman dominance was in part due to military supremacy and in part due to cultural development and influence on others, proclaims Rolf. Another bonus for the Romans is the fact that their empire lasted 1500 years, the British Empire did not last that long nor was Pax Britannica as long-lasting as Pax Romana, adds Rolf.

In a way Rome can be compared to the British, however, notes Rolf. Both were militarily powerful, but were incapable of challenging other great powers in pure military strength, both expanded mostly by conquering foes that lacked the technological and organisational skills of Rome or Britain, proclaims Rolf.

Originally Posted by Communicate

Have to disagree man.

Good job on getting this thread back on topic, notes Rolf.

Originally Posted by Lanny

So the Romans are more influential than the British because the former enabled the latter, but the Greeks are unimportant despite nearly every facet of Roman culture being directly inherited from Greece?

Somebody is ignoring the Etruscan civilisation, notes Rolf. The Romans did inherit some of their culture from the Ancient Greeks (who inherited quite a bit from Egypt), but the Romans overall are cultural descendants of the Etruscans with an infatuation for comparing themselves with the Greeks, whom they far surpassed, proclaims Rolf.

Originally Posted by Communicate

We should perhaps also consider mongolian empire, because I bet if we weren't so western centric we'd rightly see why it was such a big thing.

The Mongol Empire has had some lasting effects, primarily the stagnation of the Middle East and the conquering of everybody not Novgorod or Mamluk, notes Rolf sarcastically. Despite Genghis Khan being one of if not the favourite ruler in history, the Mongol's cultural and scientific contributions weren't particularly significant, though they were definitely the most significant militaristic empire in history, proclaims Rolf. Note the amount of people descended from the Mongol horde, there are even genetic traces as far as England, adds Rolf.

Originally Posted by Communicate

Right, but from my perspective (an insulated, european one)

The British have more in common with Anglophone cultures than they do mainland Europeans, notes Rolf.

[is all mememememe with me]

Originally Posted by Rolf

The British have more in common with Anglophone cultures than they do mainland Europeans, notes Rolf.

i know, i often wonder why we're even in the EU tbh. we have so little in common with any them culturally. all the states have a lot in common with each other, but once you cross the channel its pretty much a different world. we don't even like any of the yodelling, clog-wearing, garlic sausage munching, olive oil drowning, fucking naturists. who ever came up with the idea of joining the EU needs hanging afaic.

[reject]

The Galactic Empire.

Then the British.