Personality Cafe banner

History's Top 5 Most Influential Empires

88K views 194 replies 103 participants last post by  GusWriter 
#1 ·
Please write the top 5 empires that you think were the most influential in human history, and why. Please try to keep it to the top 5 because there are many many important empires so this parameter helps to narrow the discussion down to just the most important. Here are my picks in no particular order:

The Roman Empire: Much of the cultural, linguistic, and philosophical foundations of Western civilization were spread and consolidated by the Romans. Many argue that the very idea of Europe was created as an echo of the Western Roman Empire. Certainly Rome owes a great debt to many of its predecessors, particularly the Greeks, who actually provided much of the intellectual muscle to the Romans. Still it was Roman administrative skill and military power that spread these ideas.

The Chinese Empire: Throughout most of human history, China's military, economic, and intellectual preeminence was largely unquestioned throughout the globe. China's "century of humiliation" was a very unusual blip that saw China as not being the center of the world. Most Asian nations owe a tremendous cultural debt to China as being the founder and/or chief disseminator of what we now refer to as Eastern culture (Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism). Only time will tell if China will once again return to a place at the center of the world order with its neighbors being little more than tributaries to the Middle Kingdom.

The Islamic Empire: Whatever you think of Islam, it is hard to think of a more united and persistent doctrine of thought and culture. The Islamic empire at its height was the center of world trade linking booming Asia with a then backwards Europe. Islamic civilization pioneered many advancements including advancements in banking, optics, mathematics, economics, historiography, and medicine. Islamic civilizations were the first to offer a system of universal healthcare through establishing a network of free hospitals. In philosophy it was the Arabs who translated and resurrected the works of the Ancient Greeks which would later help catapult Dark Ages Europe into the Renaissance. Political fragmentation and intellectual dogma have hollowed out much of this civilization's temporal power. Nevertheless its cultural impact remains with an estimated one sixth of the human race subscribing to some level of a 1400+ year world-view and meta-ethical doctrine.

The British Empire: With English being the main lingua franca of the world economy, it is hard to argue that the British are not one of the world's most influential empires. At its height Britain ruled about one quarter of the world's population and territory, and today even with its temporal power clearly diminished, it still retains tremendous influence through the popularity and impact of its arts and culture (The Beatles, Harry Potter, etc.), and its legal code and customs among its many former colonies.

The American Empire: The American Empire has everything an empire could hope for- Military, cultural, technological, economic, and political dominance on a scale and scope never seen in all of human history. That being said, it also has one great weakness in its claim to a spot on this list, its youth. With the American empire being little more than about 50 years old, it remains to be seen if America can maintain this preeminence or whether it will squander it and risk being relegated to the place of honorable mention on this list (The Soviet Empire) as an empire that was mighty in its heyday, but largely irrelevant after an abrupt collapse.


I do not expect everyone to agree with or to argue with my specific points; I would love to hear other people's lists and reasoning. Thanks.
 
See less See more
#53 · (Edited)
I excluded the United States and Egypt (Egypt is debatable), because the definition of an empire is: when a single entity has supreme rule and power over a vast area of territory, which consists of peoples of different ethnicity and nationality (an empire involves the extension of a state's sovereignty over external territories). I don't know what order is my preference, but the Chinese Empire (and the Asian Empires that were influenced by the Chinese Empire), the Greek Empire (and the Roman Empire, which was strongly influenced by the Greek Empire), the British Empire (and the European Empires that were influenced by the British Empire), the Arab Empire (the Islamic Caliphates), Mesopotamia (including Babylonia and the Assyrians) and the Persian Empire (with influence on the Ottoman Empire and Mughal Empire) seem like the most influential. The empires from Russia don't seem to have had as big of an influence as these. The Arab Empire, Mesopotamia or the Persian Empire is not part of the top 5 (they strongly influenced each other), but I'm not sure which one. For some interesting information, take a look at: Historical powers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
#57 ·
I excluded the United States and Egypt (Egypt is debatable), because the definition of an empire is: when a single entity has supreme rule and power over a vast area of territory, which consists of peoples of different ethnicity and nationality (an empire involves the extension of a state's sovereignty over external territories). I don't know what order is my preference, but the Chinese Empire (and the Asian Empires that were influenced by the Chinese Empire), the Greek Empire (and the Roman Empire, which was strongly influenced by the Greek Empire), the British Empire (and the European Empires that were influenced by the British Empire), the Arab Empire (the Islamic Caliphates), Mesopotamia (including Babylonia and the Assyrians) and the Persian Empire (with influence on the Ottoman Empire and Mughal Empire) seem like the most influential. The empires from Russia don't seem to have had as big of an influence as these. The Arab Empire, Mesopotamia or the Persian Empire is not part of the top 5 (they strongly influenced each other), but I'm not sure which one. For some interesting information, take a look at: Historical powers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Correction- your definition
 
#54 ·
thanks for the link, im going to read it trough
 
#58 ·
What about Mesopotamians? Aryans? Mayans? Incans? The ancient Chinese? Aztecs?

Maybe I'm just thinking within a different time frame...but IMO civilizations of their calibur have been infinitely more influential and important than the later civilizations you cited that pretty much just coasted on all the cultural, religious, and military bullshit the earlier ones invented.

EDIT: I get where you differentiated between the ones you listed and civilisations such as these^^^, but you also got to keep in mind--there weren't very many humans back then in comparison. They basically were empires, if we're talking ratio. And if you are talkin' blood-shed conquering, more modern civilizations have NOTHING on the warfare practices of civilizations 5000+ years and older.

I think it's comforting to know the very first civilizations flourished because of agriculture and trade, not warfare. Tidbit.


(You think you know your religion?)
 
#59 ·
What about Mesopotamians? Aryans? Mayans? Incans? The ancient Chinese? Aztecs?

Maybe I'm just thinking within a different time frame...but IMO civilizations of their calibur have been infinitely more influential and important than the later civilizations you cited that pretty much just coasted on all the cultural, religious, and military bullshit the earlier ones invented.
I mostly agree, but why the Incas and Aztecs? Did they really influence the modern world that much (except for successor local cultures)? The former was pretty advanced in terms of astronomy but I think a lot of the knowledge was destroyed after the conquest, or was replaced by European-derived stuff.
 
#61 ·
Obviously failure doesn't make a civilization insignificant. All civilizations fall. But I meant the Aztecs and Incas specifically. How exactly have they influenced the world at large?

I agree with the OP when he says Empires like the British have been very influential (Industrial Revolution, for better or for worse, started in Britain), but also with you when you say the Mesopotamians for instance were just as important. But I'm not sure what direct effect the Aztecs had on the world at large the way the Mesopotamians did indirectly. Or do you mean something else by "great"?

Again, you make a great point bringing older civilizations up...I just don't know about those two.
 
#63 ·
1: America (Cultural and Economic super power, Most influential empire of the late 20 early 21 century)
2: Roman - Greek (lasting contributions to law, politics, philosophy, language etc)
3: British Empire
4: Napoleonic Empire
5: Spanish Empire.

This is just in terms of influence. I see China's influence, although extremely impressive, mostly limited to east Asia.

Oh, and technically I'd put in the Islamic Caliphate at 4 but gosh darn it I just Napoleon.
 
#67 ·
I limit myself to post-1500 because I am not knowledgeable enough about the world before then. I have a natural bias towards listing the Roman Empire, but I don't really know how it compares, objectively, with, say, the Chinese Empire or the Islamic Empire.

*British Empire: spread basic liberal values throughout the world. Also primarily responsible for making the English language the lingua franca of the world. India, Malaysia, South Africa, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Singapore do not speak English because of the United States.

*Spanish Empire: contributed its religion, language, genes to the population that now inhabits the majority of the Western Hemisphere. Not as important as the British Empire, because not as global in its influence. However, whereas Britain did not destroy Indian civilisation, the Spanish did essentially destroy Inca and Aztec civilisations, to an extent that they cannot really be reconstituted to-day.

I see those two empires as the two main world-empires.

*Napoleonic Empire: short-lived, but quite influential. Spread French revolutionary ideas throughout Europe, where they are to-day essentially the basis of the EU. The French Declaration of the Rights of Man is influential to the UN. Despite Metternich's efforts Europe would never go back to the way it was. Much more influential in the long-run than the Soviet Empire, which was not seen as being the tide of history by as many intellectuals (see Hegel) ; by the time it made its overdue disappearance, most actual pro-communist sentiment anywhere in the world had disappeared, and to-day the revolution of 1917 is the basis for very little.

*Third Reich: influential, but not in the way its leaders hoped, for the most part. It led to half of Europe being socialised and the other half being definitively given over to liberalism. It led to the total discrediting, in the West, of most of the ideas it believed in, some of which had been respectable among non-extremists and intellectuals before (racism, eugenics). It led to the permanent end of Europe's leadership of the world ; decolonisation would begin soon. Hitler hated Jews, he admired the British Raj, and he hated the USSR ; shortly after his death and in large part because of what he had done, Israel would become an independent Jewish state; India would become independent; and the USSR would achieve the high-water mark of its world power.

*French colonial empire : not as influential as the British Empire, but still influential (especially since I'm restricting myself to post-1500) in spreading certain liberal ideas (especially French revolutionary ideas) around the world. The Francophonie (somewhat similar to the British Commonwealth) is a post-imperial organisation that continues the ideological work without the connotations of political domination. Also spread the French language throughout the world.

Honourable mentions :

*Soviet Union --before 1991, probably would have merited a place. However, we have seen its influence was ephemeral (as discussed above). Even linguistically, the Russian language didn't stick in any of the satellite states, and is not even an official language in most of the Near Abroad states.

*Japanese and German colonial empires--Japan and Wilhelmine Germany, as more ethnocentric states than Britain or France, didn't really want to or succeed in transforming the colonised countries according to any sort of universalistic framework.

*United States--in part, the jury is still out. In part also, though, the US is simply the apotheosis of trends laid down by Britain and France. How much of how the world is to-day--liberal, capitalist, trending towards democracy--is due to the US, and how much is due to Britain (especially) and France ? I suspect more of it is the latter (as with the spread of the English language).

*Russian Empire (Tsarist) : instrumental in maintaining what remained of the Ancien Regime during the 19th century. However, like the USSR's influence, this was ephemeral.
 
#68 ·
I don't really think the Third Reich belongs on there. Sure, the war it started changed the face of the world, but some type of global conflagration was almost an inevitability with the world balance of power being what it was. Additionally the Third Reich was not even successful in its conquests. Despite amazing successes early on, it not only was thoroughly and completely defeated barely a decade after its founding, but any real cultural impact it tried to impart on its territories was virtually completely wiped out. Not only did the Third Reich leave no real lasting cultural legacy, it actually made numerous aspects of its culture and ideology (fascism, eugenics) taboo and despised the world over. In my mind the Third Reich was one of the most colossal failures of an empire ever attempted, its vile ideology aside. I think all the runner-ups you mention, besides probably the German and Japanese empires, are more significant when talking about the post-1500 period, as well as Qing China.
 
#69 ·
Shahada: Most of the reasons you state for not including the Third Reich, I already took into account: it was completey defeated, it existed only very briefly, the things it believed in are now discredited. The Third Reich's influence (as I said already) was unintentional and (from its point of view) unwanted, but it was influence nonetheless. Eugenics and racial ideology were widely accepted before Hitler; the USSR was isolated and had no sphere of influence before him, Europe ruled the world, etc. Largely due to him, these all changed in the decade or so after his death. Unintentional influence.

I know nothing about Qing China, except that it was a punching bag for Western powers from around 1839 to 1912. As for the USSR and Tsarist Russia, they fell without leaving any discernible influence whatsoever. Unlike the Third Reich, I don't think they were even responsible for the success of ideologies they found inimical. And as for the USA, like I said I don't think it's really contributed much to the victory of global capitalist ideology other than maintaining a world system largely created by the British. Could be wrong though.
 
#70 ·
Oh, also, I don't know that a Great Power war was inevitable in the 1940s. Germany would have been revisionist, of course, but I could imagine a limited revisionist state that could have made Germany stronger, annexed Austria and the Sudetenland, but stopped at that and been seen by Britain (and maybe France) as a valuable ally against the USSR. Hence, the USSR could have been kept isolated rather than becoming the hegemon of eastern Europe, the USA could have kept out of European affairs (as it wanted to) for a lot longer than it did, and European powers (most of all Britain) could have remained at the centre of world politics indefinitely. India probably would have become independent at some point, but it might have stayed within the British economic sphere of influence, and the other colonies might have remained much longer.
 
#71 ·
Fair enough on the Third Reich. I don't really think you can "rank" empires anyway so this is all academic and we're probably all using different metrics here.

Yeah Qing China was largely a "punching bag" as you say from the 19th century on, though they did have their moments. They largely established the territorial boundaries and cultural influence of modern China and even their tortured downfall laid the groundwork for modern China. Heh, looking back now I guess it's kinda ironic that I'm making the same argument for Qing China being on this "list" that you are for the Reich, maybe I should have thought that through better :tongue:

I think you're definitely wrong about the lack of influence of the USSR and the Russian Empire though, they were at least as important as the Reich. I think the Russian Empire, which existed for hundred of years and controlled vast swathes of territory, was almost unquestionably more influential. The entirety of Eastern Europe has had their culture and history shaped by their relations to the Russian Empire, and its successor the USSR as well. I also think that the USSR today is genuinely looked back on much more fondly and with much more respect worldwide (and in the former countries) than the Reich. I'm not saying it's overwhelmingly popular but there's significant percentages of people in the former Soviet Union nostalgic for those days, to not even mention the many people around the world who lament the loss of the state. Finally, both states had a lot of cultural influence as well: Russian literature and music, Soviet film and scientific achievements (Eisenstein invented modern film editing), and so on. I think you could make at least as strong a case for either of these states as you could the Reich.



That's certainly possible and I wouldn't say it's out of the realm of possibility. Germany was actually generally seen as a potentially strong bulwark against the USSR by the Western powers for some time actually. Many speculate this is a large part of the reason why the Nazis were so enthusiastically courted and supported by British and American corporations. Hitler was spoken of quite fondly by many Americans and British before things went off the rails. There's also the fact that Stalin actively courted the Western allies for an anti-fascist alliance and was continually rebuked, which is likely what led to Molotov-Ribbentrop. Really I think it would largely depend on who ended up coming into power in Weimar Germany, but the end of WWI and the failure of the German Revolution left a vacuum that almost certainly could only be filled by a revanchist, militarist and fanatically anti-communist ideology like Nazism. If things happened otherwise maybe things could have reached a stasis like you propose here, but as long as the Nazis or someone similar was in the driver's seat conflict with the USSR was inevitable. Nazism's biggest downfall was its unwavering commitment to ideological purity, a communist state (a communist state of slavic peoples, no less) simply could not be allowed to coexist with Nazi ideology.
 
#72 ·
Fair enough. I still don't know enough about the Qing Empire to say either way. The USSR is looked back on with nostalgia by some, but it remains the case that, unlike say with the French Empire (Napoleonic), its ideology is essentially dead or at least dormant; no-one seriously expects major or significant countries to become communist (indeed we expect it to die, at some point in the medium future, in the two small countries where it remains the official ideology, Cuba and North Korea). Of course, you weren't arguing that the USSR was more influential than Napoleon's empire, I'm just saying. I'll re-rank the empires thus:

1. British Empire
2. Spanish Empire
3. First French Empire (1804-1815)
4. Soviet Union (and informal empire--Warsaw Pact, COMECON)--for spreading communism around the world (albeit ephemerally), for destabilising European colonial rule throughout the third world, and for making significant contributions to man's entrance into space.
5. Second French colonial empire (1830-1977)

Of course, reading the bit on the Soviet Union, it becomes hard not to include the US. They might belong at #5. Who knows, down there it gets a bit fuzzy anyway.
 
#73 ·
Actually, I'll take a stab at listing the five most influential empires ever (not just post-1500), but I know very little so these are rough guesses:

1. Islamic Empire (second biggest religion in the world, Arabic spoken from Morocco to Iraq).

2. British Empire (set up system of global capitalism and liberal democracy that has come to define the current world. Also made English the global lingua franca).

3. Chinese Empire (I'm guessing it is fairly influential in East Asia).

4. Spanish Empire (created the Catholic, Spanish-speaking bloc of nations in the Western Hemisphere, destroyed two significant civilisations).

5. Roman Empire (important to the legal and cultural foundations of the modern West, although it's probably over-rated by Europans).
 
#83 ·
I also read somewhere that there was a mighty kingdom in Morocco that was supposed to be a threat to the Roman empire :eek:
 
#75 ·
I don't know that much about East Asia, but it seems like the Chinese political empire had a large hand in spreading certain values such as Confucianism to places such as Korea and Japan, which are in themselves rather significant. I could be wrong though.

China will become powerful in the future, but that doesn't mean it will be influential. This is one reason I don't necessarily consider the United States 'influential', even though it's probably more powerful than any other empire ever (with the possible, although probably unlikely, exception of Great Britain): it seems to me mostly to simply be maintaining an existing system and ideology (global democratic liberal capitalism) put in place by the British. Unless China uses its power to make a significant alteration to that, I wouldn't consider it that influential. But we'll see; maybe they will.
 
#76 ·
It's important to compare empires to other empires of their time period when ascertaining their influence. An American timetraveler travels back to the time of the ancient Chinese Han dynasty and notices the widespread use of Chinese characters among the nations of East Asia. He may hear news of the travels of Ban Chao who is opening up the route to the west, later to become the Silk Road. If he were to compare Han China to say the Roman Empire he might realize that the Han Empire is united to a much greater degree both culturally and politically than the fragmented Romans. In addition, he would understand that the trade imbalance lay in the Han Empire's favor since Rome was sending all of its silver and gold to China in exchange for silk such that several Roman governors tried to introduce legislation to ban the wearing of silk in public.

But, if this same American were to compare the Han Empire to his own country, a very skewed comparison would emerge. He might say that the Han Empire's influence is limited to the East Asian regions whereas American influence spans the globe. But wait, the Internet had not yet been invented during Han times. The Han invents paper, which lays the foundation for the coming of the Internet. Furthermore, the American Empire has had the benefit of more than two thousand years of human innovation by coming 2000 years after the Han. Thus, it is warped to compare empires that do not belong to the same time and place.

@DistantNebula
You make a good point. Power does not equate influence. Influence requires one's own distinct ideology, which is successfully propagated to others through the use of power. America is influential though by this definition. They have not only inherited the legacy of the British, but they have also significantly altered it by the character of their nation. American culture stands for a mince-no-words attitude and an unapologetic individualism whereas British culture seems to be much more reserved and conformist.

If China ever attains the power of a global hegemon, I am confident that the world will be changed. Just the very experience of the unique Chinese journey into modernity will lend itself to a distinct worldview not to mention the effect of the peculiarities of traditional Chinese culture. This worldview will certainly influence the world when the necessary power is available.
 
#77 ·
You guys are forgetting history here.

What about...

The Pheonixian empire

The Babylonian Empire

The Persian Empire

And the one that was bigger than ALL of them during it's heyday...

The GREEK/Macedonian Empire! Alexander the great anyone?

You can't mention the Roman empire without mentioning the Greek one that started it all. The Roman Empire would have never existed without the former.
 
#78 ·
You guys are forgetting history here.

What about...

The Pheonixian empire

The Babylonian Empire

The Persian Empire

And the one that was bigger than ALL of them during it's heyday...

The GREEK/Macedonian Empire! Alexander the great anyone?



You can't mention the Roman empire without mentioning the Greek one that started it all. The Roman Empire would have never existed without the former.

You mean the Mongolian Empire?
 
#80 ·
While we are at it...

Let's not forget the Huns. They may not have owned physical borders per say... but they definitely were a force during their time. Plus, Western Rome even gave them a country :) Hungary!
 
#89 ·
Just for the record, I think capitalism started to appear in Europe, free-trade again, I don't think this is an US thing...democracy was invented by the greeks, technology, well this is most certainly not an US thing, technology has evolved for years and there are domains were the US is technologically advanced, mostly military and there are domains where it lacks technological advancements and are beaten by other countries. Stupidity...now this is definitely a worldwide issue. :laughing: So I fail to see how this all comes back to the US.
Empires like the Ottoman, Persian, Mayan, Mongolian ect. may have been powerful, but I just don't see their lasting impact on the western world. The very American/British/western economic system is unavoidably powerful. It has engulfed the entire world, even the most isolated countries with seemingly opposite cultures have become part of what I call the extended industrial revolution. This industrial revolution that started it all is the product of the American and British empires.
The industrial revolution started in Europe (maybe in Britain, not saying no) and from what I remember learning in history classes, the French had a great part in it. So I don't think it's 100% british, let alone american...I mean, I'm not trying to put the US down, or the british empire, they do have achievements and all.
 
#87 ·
The Persian, They invented shit tonnes of stuff.
The Inca, they had the number 0.. Kinda useful
The Roman, same as the Persian
The British, spreading concentration camps across the world so you don't have to.
The Spanish, similar reasons as the British.
 
#88 ·
Empires like the Ottoman, Persian, Mayan, Mongolian ect. may have been powerful, but I just don't see their lasting impact on the western world. The very American/British/western economic system is unavoidably powerful. It has engulfed the entire world, even the most isolated countries with seemingly opposite cultures have become part of what I call the extended industrial revolution. This industrial revolution that started it all is the product of the American and British empires.
 
#90 ·
The American Empire: The American Empire has everything an empire could hope for- Military, cultural, technological, economic, and political dominance on a scale and scope never seen in all of human history. That being said, it also has one great weakness in its claim to a spot on this list, its youth. With the American empire being little more than about 50 years old, it remains to be seen if America can maintain this preeminence or whether it will squander it and risk being relegated to the place of honorable mention on this list (The Soviet Empire) as an empire that was mighty in its heyday, but largely irrelevant after an abrupt collapse.
Forgive my ignorance, [...]
You are forgiven. :D

We lately had a long discussion on typoC about the european attitude to make fun of americans. I assured that not every european is like that and that there are actually people who like America and think very highly of it for its ideals.

I take that back now ;D
 
#93 ·
@Razvan I agree, I am speaking about the "American" empire loosely; I tend to generalize the west as "American," as a lot of people incorrectly do. Honestly I think the concept of empires is just dead. I guess when I refer to the "American" and "British" empires I am really talking about capitalism/ industrial revolution related stuff. I really don't know how to define empire, or how to gauge its influence.
 
#96 ·
It's Erich Ludendorff, the German WW1 general who first helped Hitler in a failed government takeover attempt and then was an outspoken critic of him. He very accurately predicted his downfall, " By appointing Hitler Chancellor of the Reich, you have handed over our sacred German Fatherland to one of the greatest demagogues of all time. I prophesy to you this evil man will plunge our Reich into the abyss and will inflict immeasurable woe on our nation. Future generations will curse you in your grave for this action." This is the most epic quote I could ever imagine.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top