If it's an "empire" in a sense, but lacking an "emperor", I'll simply call it a multiethnic nation. Like modern China: no emperor, but an "empire" in the sense that it has many ethnicities (Han, Manchu, etc.) and so on. The British Empire didn't have an "Emperor" per se, until 1877. They referred to thier colonial empire as "the dominions beyond the seas". In 1877, however, Queen Victoria titled herself "empress of india", thus making an actual imperial title to the "empire". Most nations called an "empire", however, have an "emperor" or "king of kings" type of title.
1. USA 2. Ming China 3. Roman Empire 4. Han China 5. Abbasid Caliphate 6. British Empire 7. Achmaenid (Ancient) Persian Empire 8. Spanish Empire 9. Mughal Empire 10. Mauryan (Classical Indian) Empire
According to the map, it says Britain conquered Afghanistan, but this is true. The British could not get past the Durrani line which has now become the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan. I believe the largest empire is the British Empire though it was hard for them to maintain and it didn't last very long due to its sheer size. The Moghal (Mongol) Empire under Timuchin Chengez (Gengis) Khan, Kublai, and his descendants was also very large, but they merely obtained tribute from their subjects and never actually 'ruled' them. Their empire was then made into a Muslim Sultanate when the Maghals became Muslim. The longest lasting Empire would have to the Khilafah, Caliphate, which lasted almost 1000 years. The Khilafah has historically also been the determining factor major of the world's Muslim cultures and many countries entire cultures are based solely on its history. The impact of the Khilafah on the regions which it controlled are enormous. The British and Moghal Empires had significant influence on their peoples, but as far as influence I believe Islamic Khilafah was the greatest. Peace.
One thing you said is actually true, the British Empire was the largest. The Caliphate Empire however, spanned Spain to Central Asia, was conquered by Muslims and broke up after about 200 years. And of course, back then, it was either the 'carrot or the sword.' In other words, join Islam or die, very simple indeed.
Historically there have been different rulers controlling the Khilafat from Sahabah, Umayya, Abbasi, Seljuk, Uthmania (Ottoman). Majority of the Islamic States during the time, while not specified on the map of Khilafat control, were under rule by the Khilafat and swore bayat to Khalifah. The Islamic Khilafat had different regions which had local governments who were loyal to the Khalifah. Peace.
Hmm...yes, lasting for about 3000 years with relatively the same culture throughout would be a major achievement...add to that the massive structures they built to display thier power.
Hello young scientists, I was trying to find links on contributions made to society be the Ottoman Empire or technology pioneeered and couldnt find any. Can someone point a few out to me, i know there must be many. It is undeniable that the Roman Empire changed the world forever. I cite governance, infrastructure, architecture and some of the greatest artwork created during this time period. Alot of which just did not exist prior. They had really no religion to speak of, i think they believed in human achievements more than anything. I would not use the physical size or the power of its war machine as a sign of a great civilization. Didnt the founding fathers of America look at Roman Empire for ideas as much as or more than they did Britian?
Ummmm the Roman Empire is the reason Europe is Christian. They were personally responsible for the Dark Ages. Previous to that they were pagan, and sacrificed livestock and that kind of thing.
Recognition and Archiving Knowledge of Modern Diseases Training of Specialists in Medicial Field Modern Primary School System Wind Power in early Islamic History Construction of Complex Dams and Hydraulic Technology Early Muslim Science Discoveries 1001 Achievements of Islam Islamic contributions Essay on Islam and Medicine Islamic Technology and Europe Islamic Medicine Islamic Contributions to Science and Math Arab and Muslim Influence on Sciences Muslim Scientists Peace.
Please note that inaccurate is not semantically equivalent to wrong. The conversion to Christianity of a single Roman Emperor set in train a series of events that led to the nominal Christian character of Europe. That is quite a different thing from what you said. The Roman Empire, as a conceptual entity, cannot be personally responsible for anything. The Dark Ages were a consequence of the fall of the Empire, not caused by the Empire. Since pagan is derived from the Latin paganus, meaning 'rural' or 'related to the country', it would be wholly inappropriate to call the Romans pagans. Perhaps you meant heathen. At any rate not all their diverse pre-Christian beliefs called for livestock sacrifice. I am confident Vasislidante will come up with his own set of objections.
For one thing, since a Roman Emperor converted to christianity, which caused the chain of events to occur, couldn't you just simplify that into what GF said? And, if the Empire hadn't been stupid enough to cause thier fall, then they wouldn't have collapsed. And the word you two are looking for was "polytheistic". "Pagan" cannot really apply because Roman polytheism was highly organized and urbanized, and "heathen" cannot really apply because that more describes northern European polytheism, i.e Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Old Germanic polytheism, than classical Greco-Roman polytheism.
That, and the ancient Greeks, and especially to thier own land: the Iroqouis Confederation was one major influence, as was the local colonial governments like the Virginia House of Burgesses.
Speaking of size. the No.1 Empire is Russia. Got the most land, so screw all other empires, Russian empire is the greatest cause what does empire want? to expand. And guess what Empire expanded the most? Russia.
DH, you seem very knowledgable about middle east history, unless you are a very skilled fabricator. - (I am too ignorate in all this to be sure you are not one, but do not think you are one, so I want to ask a question of you.) I read once, long ago, that Alexandria the Great conquered most of what we now call Turkey and down into Iraq, but was not able (or did not care to) control the mountainous region which most of the population living there then and even today, would like to be recognized as a Nation, called Kurdistan. Is any of this reasonable true? Is it true that the mountainous land in which many Kurds live has been unconquered or at east enjoyed a degree of self-rule for all of recorded history? I lived most of my pre-college years in the US state of West Virginia, which is also mountainous. The state motto of W. Va. is three Latin words, which translate as "Mountaineers are always free."* I suspect that GWB's Iraq war will end with the division of Iraq and finally cause Kurdistan to be a recognized nation. This will cause a significant part of Southern Turkey's population to want to become a "Turkish state of Kurdistan" and a civil war in Turkey. I.e. the net effect of GWB's war will be war in the region for at least a couple of generations and nothing resembling any "model democracy" in Iraq, but most of GWB's decisions have been about as bad as one can imagine. He has a knack for doing the things, which will destroy the American empire and end the global dominance of the US dollar. I would appreciate your views on all of this. ---------------------------------------------------------- *I do not even know my US history well, but suspect that this motto was not always the noble, general, claim it appears to be. W.Va was a western part of the state of Virginia until the US civil war, in which the "slave states" fought the "free states". Virginia was a "slave state,"** but the western part of it did not support slavery as much as it did the idea of each man has the right to determine his own life, make "moonshine," hunt when ever he wanted to, etc. I suspect the "free" in the state motto was originally equivalent to "not slave," but even if that is true, to be "not slave" is sort of the same thing as "free" in the more general sense the motto is understood today. My heart is not Diamond, but is with the Kurds. -They should be recognized as a nation. **Slavery, of course, was not the true reason for the US civil war. The true reason was, as is almost always the case, an economic conflict, But few are willing to die so that the wealthy can become more so. Consequently, some nobel cause is always proclaimed to be the reason for every war.
I have also heard this from many Kurdish people. The Kurdish were known for being strong and great warriors, a very independent people. When Islam came to the Kurdish region, many Kurds joined the Islamic armies and quickly gained respect as brave and courageous people. Even Salahuddin Ayyubi, the famous Islamic general during the crusades, was Kurdish. He was renowned in his time and even now as a military genius, yet being extremely kind and devoted to his religion. I do know that Alexander the Great did have a hard time in Afghanistan as well, as he met fierce resistance from Afghanis who are also renowned for being brave and courageous in the region. Speaking of the region, in my country of Pakistan we have people of the Macedonian army of Alexander the Great who settled in the north of our country in that era and whose descendants live there today, they have very white skin and dress different than our people. Yes, before they joined the Islamic Caliphate, they were an ethnic group with a region on the north of Arabia. When Kurdhish people became Muslim, they became devoted subjects to the Islamic government and rose in ranks in the government. Many Kurdish regements fought the crusaders with Salahuddin during the Middle Ages. They enjoyed great respect and admiration during the Islamic rule of the Middle East, even under the Ottoman empire. In the beginning of the 1900s, the Young Turks organization (which was a european educated revolutionary group) took control of the Ottoman Empire and took the Khalifah out of power and ended the Islamic ottoman Empire. The Young Turks were responsible for genocide of Armenians and many minorities, and after a while they left control of all territories which used to belong to the Ottomans, leaving them at mercy for the Europeans. This was of the demands which the Europeans supported the Young Turks into power for doing. After this, the Europeans directly invaded the Middle East and subjugated Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Berbers, and many ethnic peoples in the region. During the end of the imperialist era, after World War 2, the European powers decided to divide up the nations of the former Ottoman empire among only their sellouts among the Arabs, Persians who sold their own people for better relations with the Europeans. This is how iraq's kinf Faisal, Iran's Shah, the Saudis, and many dictators came from. They are descendants of the parties which supported genocide of their own nations to gain power and favor form the Europeans. The Europeans were afraid of the Kurdish people, this is why they divided up the Kurds between Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. Like Afghanis, Kurdish were strong people and practiced religion strongly. Even today, the Kurdish parties in influence in Iraq are many Islamic parties. Kurdish people are Sunni Muslim. So after some Kurdish desired freedom, they were not allowed by Iraq's old government and even the new one because they live on top of oil. I believe that Kurdistan should be a separate country and that the oil should belong to only the Kurds. Kurdistan was a region with a local government in the old Islamic Khilafah, and the Kurdish were very loyal to the Islamic government. However the Kurds should not be ruled by Americans and right now many American government companies are controlling Kurdish oil. Many Muslims in the world are against American influence in their region, and the rights of the Kurdish to a separate country is natural for the people. Yes I agree with you. The American people do not want to subjugate Iraq, however they are being manipulated by the government to support this war. The American people have recently become fiercely anti-Muslim and Americans must realize that Iraqis and Afghanis are Muslims and they must respect their cultures. Not all Americans are bad, but the majority of the people who voted for Bush and supported Iraq war are hated by the Muslim people of the world, we blame these people for genocide of our people. Thanks for asking these questions, I'll be free to answer any other questions you or anyone else might have, please send me a private message. Peace.
Thank you for the information. I note for the benefit of those who do not know, it was Salahuddin who retook Jerusalem from the Christians, but unlike when the "Christians" conquered the city, he did not slaughter the inhabitants. Instead he gave them safe passage to return to Christian lands. I would also like to note, since this is a science forum in large part, that Ptolemy’s great collection of astronomical data has come down to us "Westerners" only because it was copied into Arabic and preserved while most of my ancestors were illiterate. If they happened to have a copy, they would not doubt have found it useful only for wiping their ass, but most probably did not bother with that. It is an unfortunate characteristic of many Americans to be both ignorant and arrogant. When a local school board in western Kentucky (or SW West Virginia, I forget which) held a public meeting about 55 years ago to discuss the advisability of adding a foreign language to the high school curriculum, I read in my local paper a summary of some of the comments. The only thing I clearly remember now, was the reason why one old man was opposed. Holding his Bible high and waving it, he said: “If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it dam well is good enough for our kids.” Some of his grand children are no doubt active in the “Intelligent Design” movement of today. I was raised as a "church going Christian" but I am now agnostic. I have more admiration for Islam's historical global actions than for those of the Christians;* however, on a more individual level, my feelings often reverse. That is, I think things like wanting to execute an Islamic man for switching to another religion is outrageous intolerance. etc. (Ref. The recent case in your country.) ---------------------------------------------------- *You no doubt agree and know many horrors the Christians have committed on innocent people. I am an American, by accident of birth, but now live in Brazil, by choice. What the Christians did to the natives living here (and all of South America) I think was much worse, if that is possible. From the POV of their global actions, the Devil could not have designed more effective agents for mass murder and mayhem than Christian invaders of other's lands. Unfortunately, the arrogance and ignorance that this is founded on is still very wide spread among Americans today. GWB is a good example of what I am referring to. Peace
