Thought about it and wow most empires in history are middling or just above average

Thought about it and wow most empires in history are middling or just above average

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I cant find the windmill one

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Mongol empire not in S tier
    *Instantly ignored*

  3. 1 month ago
    Sage

    Sage

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >HRE that high
    It’s entire history is just being mogged by France.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What you think of medieval europe comes from the HRE. It was the most influencial entity in europe alongaide the papacy for centuries

      >Mongol empire not in S tier
      *Instantly ignored*

      >mongol empire
      They're at b for being big. But other than that their empire was a joke as it was short lived

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What we think of as medieval Europe is primarily just France. If it’s not France then it’s England (French as frick at the time) or the HRE, the moronic dysfunctional sibling of France. But ultimately nowhere that was not at least partially French gets any even slightly accurate medieval representation.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's blatantly false and probably due the fact that you probably view history through the lens of england. Europe during medieval era and rennaisance was centered around two poles the papacy and the HRE

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            So why was the HRE constantly getting BTFO by France? Even the Ottonian HRE itself was a pale imitation of the Frankish empire. Even the crusades for Jerusalem were primarily French endeavours.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >So why was the HRE constantly getting BTFO by France
            It wasn't. France didn't even become relevant until the reign of philip augustus.
            >Even the crusades for Jerusalem were primarily French endeavours.
            Okay? How is this relevant?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            > France didn't even become relevant until the reign of philip augustus.
            Bro, the HRE itself was a creation of the Franks. Who were kings of France long before they conquered the Saxons, the Burgundians, the Italians, the Frisian’s and all the other groups that started LARPing as Frank’s later. If you want to deny French medieval influence, you’d be better off being a Byzaboo instead.
            >Okay? How is this relevant
            If your argument is “the HRE was the most powerful medieval state because it’s where the popular image of all things medieval comes from”, this conspicuously ignores that one of the first things people think when they think “medieval” is the crusades, specifically the crusades for Jerusalem. This has a far, far greater impact on the popular understanding of the medieval era, along with all the other typical tropes. When people think “medieval bard” what they are really imagining is a specific tradition in Occitan culture. When people think “medieval exploitation” what they’re thinking of is basically the Norman yoke in England. The only people who think “HRE” are people who played Warhammer.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Stupid pop history understanding of things.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >HRE
            >getting btfo by France
            >constantly
            The absolute state of third-world education.
            >Somewhat ironically, Francis' "impeccable courage" in attempting to ward off the Marchese resulted in Francis' own men getting in the way of the French cannons, thus making it far too easy for the imperial warriors to overwhelm them. Within a couple of hours, Francis' battle was all but lost, and Francis himself was taken prisoner by Charles' troops for a year
            source: ancient origins

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Uhm, krautbros, what happened to our clay?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >muh dynastic clay
            Dude, France is Africa-lite now. Germany is not much better but at least they're mostly Anatolian and Eastern European as opposed to sub Saharans and Nafris in France and Pakis, BAME, Pajeets in Britain.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Bro, the very top of OP’s list are Britain and Rome. One of the most mutted countries in Europe and the very inventor of globohomosexual itself. If getting mutted 1000 years later is a problem then the entire list is disqualified except Mongolia.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Implying the HRE would have let it happen

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You are a fricking moron. In the middle ages the French Western border did not change at all and your .gif agrees with this.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nice Spanish victory. I think Francis I was even held up in Madrid. I think he was talking about Germany, though.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >HRE
            At least a few Germans were definitely involved. Does picrel count?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Is this the battle with the albanians mercenary?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Probably, there were stradioti (not always Albanian) fighting for every side. Mostly Venice, but other states hired them too.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        > What you think of medieval europe comes from the HRE. It was the most influencial entity in europe alongaide the papacy for centuries
        It really wasn’t. Poland, England, Spain, and Scandinavia didn’t give a shit until the late middle ages.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Abbasids should be A, the Mamluks should be C at best. The Inca should be B, maybe even A, considering the technological gap between the old world and new world and what they were still able to do in spite of that. The French Colonial empire should be higher, just because they lost to the strongest empire in human history doesn't mean they weren't impressive in their own right. Oman doesn't have a ton of amazing feats but they largely managed to avoid war in a way that is comparable to Switzerland so I think that is impressive. I get why you put the Mongol empire in C, I still don't know how I feel about it considering their size and martial prowess

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The Abbasids should be A, the Mamluks should be C at best
      The Mamluks were a stable almost 300 year dynasty with many accomplishments in many fields. Abbasids lasted aroumd 100 years before their empire crumbled and fractured permanently.
      >muh golden age
      Majority of what we associate with the golden age is during buyid dynasty at which point the abbasids were a non-entity

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        And the Han dynasty was also more unstable than people think but it was the benchmark for Chinese empires in the same way the Abbasids were. Even the puppet Caliphs codified important Sunni legal concepts. Influence matters, plus 100 years of peak is not as short of a period of dominance as you're making it out to be.

        >The French Colonial empire should be higher,
        No Britain, Spain, Portugal, and the Dutch colonial empires are the impressive ones

        That's just moronic, I respect Portugal for losing so much and still being able to benefit somehow from their empire but France literally had the power to compete with the greatest empire in history. They're C at worst.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >And the Han dynasty was also more unstable than people think
          Now this is new. The Han empire was stabel for most its 400 year run.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >That's just moronic, I respect Portugal for losing so much and still being able to benefit somehow from their empire but France literally had the power to compete with the greatest empire in history. They're C at worst.
          No. Portugal started colonialism and dominated world trade for the first time. Spain followed suit with the conquest of the americas. Brits spread everywhere. Dutch ate away at Spain and Portugal and eventually controlled indonesia. All of these are much more worthy of rpaise than France

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Portugal was also the most long lasting colonial power (1400-2002) and it was the last colonial power to fight for their colonies.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Sea based empires are trash, not real power, going around shitty ships conquering backward nations is shameful. Land based empires conquer their equals and superiors. Nobody will remember colonial empires from modern era just as nobody remember phoenicians, athenians, venetians, genoa, northern sea and aragonese empires today.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >nobody remember phoenicians, athenians, venetians, genoa, northern sea and aragonese empires today.
            You just listed the most sovl historical countries

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No, just nobody cares enough to consider colonialist powers, no great conquerors and figures, just merchants going around their ships and fighting backward tribes and kingdoms.
            Alexander the Great, Charlemagne, the prophet Muhammad, Gengis Khan, Cyrus the Great, Sargon, Narmer, these are great names worthy of being considered.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >nobody cares enough to consider colonialist powers, no great conquerors and figures, just merchants going around their ships and fighting backward tribes and kingdoms.
            Speak for yourself historylet

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I don't take seriously people who celebrate conquering spears, swords and arrows using armies and warbands while using guns

            >Come tell us how you slew them old Arabs two by two, like the Zulus they had spears, bows and arrows, how brave you faced one with your 16-pounder gun and you frightened them natives to their marrow
            -Come Out Ye Black & Tans

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >rest of the world were backwards barbarians with pre-medieval tech before Europeans came along and enlightened them
            Wow, racist much?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          France is not the same thing as French Colonial Empire. They had the worst colonial empire out of all the mjor colonial powers and only above latecomers like Germany

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The French Colonial empire should be higher,
      No Britain, Spain, Portugal, and the Dutch colonial empires are the impressive ones

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    The Akkadians and Assyrians already had several empires centuries before the Achaemenids

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >these guys should higher because of *thing I just made up*

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian_Empire
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Assyrian_Empire
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Assyrian_Empire

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Post the chart so others can fill it out

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://tiermaker.com/create/empires-of-the-world-tier-list-235257

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why is bulgaria that high? The ming above the tang? Aksum above austria hungary which is exactly above habsburg austria? What are you talking about

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Why is bulgaria that high?
      It exerted immense influence on slavs. Cyrllic script was invented by them for example
      >The ming above the tang?
      I just tossed things into categories didnt bother ranking them within those categories. I do think the Ming were better than the Tang. The Tang were a failed state for half of their existence with the military governors being independent dynasts paying lip service to the imperial court. Their first half was good enough to toss them into B but I honestly considered to put them in C.
      >Aksum above austria hungary which is exactly above habsburg austria
      Like I said not ranking within categories

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        cyrillic script was invented by greek monks for the bulgarians, not by the bulgarians themselves
        you didn't even put the eastern roman empire on there (unless you consider it Rome, in which case fair enough)

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >cyrillic script was invented by greek monks for the bulgarians
          A quick google search search can prove you wrong.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Mongols Empire in S tier

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Safavid in C
    Much lower

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    jews should be s tier because according to /misc/ they control everything

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Napoleonic France and Russian Empire at its height should be a tier above. To put them in the same category as Bulgaria or Netherlands is laughable. They controlled immense regions within Europe.
    It's also not accurate to put colonials on par with European empires, with exception of British since they did conquer India.

    Most importantly HRE, was more of a confederation. It hardly can be counted as an Empire on par with the first 2-3 positions, as they were not 1 government.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Most importantly HRE, was more of a confederation. It hardly can be counted as an Empire on par with the first 2-3 positions, as they were not 1 government.
      This only applies to the HRE towards the end of its existence. During medieval times it was no less cohesive than France or England, and far more powerful.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Napoleonic France and Russian Empire at its height
      Why are these special is that they should only count when they were good?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I would assume all of those counted at its height. Otherwise British empire would most definitely be below France, as France over longer period in time was much more powerful militarily and economically.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Better, more historically accurate list.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You are a homosexual

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        it is he who says it that is

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Spanish empire is highly overrated. Most of their conquest was done by making others fight for them, bribing them with deals and positions in the colonies.
      The way they ran their colonies were also extremely inefficient and is a primary reason why they were mogged hard by other colonial powers. They had the first mover advantage(which is how they got “so big”), were at one point the wealthiest nation in the world(on paper), and yet of all the colonial nations their downfall was by far the hardest plunging into poverty during the late 19th century.

      To mismanage your economy THAT bad is something only turd world nations csn do.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The spanish empire's greatest achievement was arriving with smallpox when two of the greatest amerindian empires were facing internal turmoil.

        Your ancestor literally lived in hut made of pigshit while mine lived in palaces.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          And the amerindians that had the unpleasant experience of dealing with your spanish ancestors thought they smelled bad, juan

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nobody in Europe washed in those times, one French king once told its mistress "I'm coming in 2 weeks, don't wash yourself".
            Not knowing that de facto tells me that you're some coping third worlder.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >ancestors lived in palaces
            >were roughly as stinky and unhygienic as the barbars
            grim

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >t.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The way they ran their colonies were also extremely inefficient
        – “ THE INDIAN FARMER IS POOR BUT FREE. THEIR SITUATION IS MUCH BETTER THAN THAT OF THE PEASANTS OF NORTHERN EUROPE, ESPECIALLY RUSSIANS AND GERMANS. THE NUMBER OF SLAVES IS PRACTICALLY ZERO. ”

        – “ THIS MUST BE KNOWN IN EUROPE! MEXICAN MINERS ARE THE BEST PAID IN THE WORLD, THEY RECEIVE SIX TO SEVEN TIMES MORE SALARY FOR THEIR WORK THAN A GERMAN MINER. ”

        – ABSENCE OF SLAVERY: “ NEW SPAIN HAS A NOTABLE ADVANTAGE OVER THE UNITED STATES, AND THAT IS THAT THE NUMBER OF SLAVES, BOTH AFRICAN AND MIXED-RACE, IS ALMOST NIL. THE NUMBER OF AFRICAN SLAVES IN THE UNITED STATES EXCEEDS ONE MILLION, WHICH IS ONE SIXTH OF ITS POPULATION. ”

        – ECONOMIC PROSPERITY: “ AMONG ALL THE KINGDOMS (OF SPAIN IN AMERICA) MEXICO CURRENTLY OCCUPIES THE FIRST PLACE, BOTH FOR ITS TERRITORIAL WEALTH AND FOR THE FAVORABLE POSITION OF ITS POSITION FOR TRADE WITH EUROPE AND ASIA.

        – SCIENTIFIC ADVANCES: NO CITY IN AMERICA, WITHOUT EXCEPTING THOSE IN THE UNITED STATES, CAN EXHIBIT AS LARGE AND SOLID SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTIONS AS MEXICO CITY. THE CAPITAL AND OTHER CITIES OF MEXICO HAVE SCIENTIFIC ESTABLISHMENTS THAT WILL LEAD TO A COMPARISON WITH THOSE OF EUROPE.

        YES, HUMBOLDT IN A SINGLE DOCUMENT DENIES MANY OF THE ANGLO-SAXON LIES. SOMEONE MIGHT SAY THAT HE HIMSELF “ LIED ”. FOR HUMBOLDT WAS GERMAN AND PROTESTANT, SO IT IS ILLOGICAL THAT HE HAD A SPECIAL INCLINATION TO SPEAK WELL OF THE SPANISH CATHOLICS AND THEIR KINGDOMS.

        IT IS NOT ABOUT IDEALIZING THAT PAST, BUT LEARNING FROM IT, AND THAT MEXICANS CAN REALIZE THAT “ YES YOU CAN ” IF YOU EVER COULD. WE CAN GET AHEAD LEARNING FROM OUR HISTORY, THE STORY THAT SADLY WE DON'T KNOW.

        SOURCE:

        – HUMBOLDT VON ALEXANDER (1811). POLITICAL ESSAY ON THE KINGDOM OF NEW SPAIN

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >latin american peasants lived better than european serfs
          >all humboldt can say about the US is...uh...FRICKIN Black folk
          lol

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Post the original text in German, Black person.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >le false translation
            How about looking into it by yourself you moronic Black person?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Rome is on everyone's S tier.
      SOVL

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/OtBolea.png

      The only true tier list.

      https://i.imgur.com/7Xs4mI8.png

      The academic consensus just dropped

      https://i.imgur.com/0kIoPRh.png

      The dry and virtuous soul image coming through.

      Judged on how impressive the expansion of the Empire was and it's lasting influence even beyond its inevitable demise.

      https://i.imgur.com/8aShHyU.png

      I spent an hour making this list.
      I made a rigid system for the ranking:
      Dynastic longevity (when applicable)
      The prosperity of the people living in the state (very important)
      Conquest and brutality of the armies
      etc.

      As you can see, I'm very much in favour of great civilisations built upon egalitarianism (more or less), like the Achaemenids, rather than the brutal slaughterfests that is the Mongol Empire of the 13th century that can barely be called a state. Some of you may call me out for listing the European colonial empires that low, and I can explain that by arguing for two points; that the colonial empires of the age of exploration weren't empires in the traditional sense; and that the European colonies of the new world were built upon merciless conquest and subjugation. The Golden Horde is an exception because it ironically enough brought some semblance of stability to the 'Rus and advanced trade routes and so on.

      https://i.imgur.com/Vif9BFX.png

      My objectively correct list, thy are in no specific order

      why are you all rating the Dutch Empire so highly? They were the convenience store of Europe for 300 years then faded away to nothing.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They literally founded modern institutions.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They were basically just a source of ideas for Brits to steal and implement more successfully. They’re like the Xerox of colonial empires.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          what institutions did the found besides the concept of the modern company?

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Maratha
    > D Tier
    Kys cuck. It literally stopped the islamization of India and is one of the biggest reasons why the Indian culture is still alive. It is A tier at the least. If not for infighting it would be S++ tier.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >one of the biggest reasons why the Indian culture is still alive
      sounds like a good reason for F tier

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The British empire is B tier. It wasn't more impressive than the Spanish empire, merely more recent.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The spanish empire's greatest achievement was arriving with smallpox when two of the greatest amerindian empires were facing internal turmoil.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The only true tier list.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The academic consensus just dropped

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Ok but Mughals have to be moved up to garbage tier. They kinda tried.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Who?
    >Srivijaya
    >Khmer
    >Tu'i Tonga
    >Fricking Chola
    >Who
    Drop dead historylet

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The dry and virtuous soul image coming through.

    Judged on how impressive the expansion of the Empire was and it's lasting influence even beyond its inevitable demise.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Austrian Empire
      >A tier
      Literally outlived by communist tinpot dictatorships. Belongs on whatever tier the Central African Empire is in.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Only one list had the presence of mind to include Alexander's Macedonia.

    Absolute brainlets all around.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I spent an hour making this list.
    I made a rigid system for the ranking:
    Dynastic longevity (when applicable)
    The prosperity of the people living in the state (very important)
    Conquest and brutality of the armies
    etc.

    As you can see, I'm very much in favour of great civilisations built upon egalitarianism (more or less), like the Achaemenids, rather than the brutal slaughterfests that is the Mongol Empire of the 13th century that can barely be called a state. Some of you may call me out for listing the European colonial empires that low, and I can explain that by arguing for two points; that the colonial empires of the age of exploration weren't empires in the traditional sense; and that the European colonies of the new world were built upon merciless conquest and subjugation. The Golden Horde is an exception because it ironically enough brought some semblance of stability to the 'Rus and advanced trade routes and so on.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Also, the list is ordered from left to right, meaning that the German Empire is the best state from B tier while the Seleucids are at the lowest level of B tier

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I'm very much in favour of great civilisations built upon egalitarianism (more or less), like the Achaemenids
      lmao their entire dynastic history was brutally putting down revolts. imagine swallowing ancient propaganda

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    My objectively correct list, thy are in no specific order

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why is America not on the teir list?

    They are literally an empire.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    -Arabs were more influential than Romans and influented all Medieval world straight into modernity.
    -Romans are overated, nobody cared about them outside of Western Europe.
    -Mongols created the largest empires in history.
    -Colonialist empires, starting with Spanish and ending with British, were a joke, sea-based empires are trashy tier.
    -Incans, Mayans, Seljuks, North Sea Empire, Polish, Serbian, etc, etc, etc., and all these irrelevant local self proclaimed empires should not be even taken into consideration.
    -HRE and Ottomans were irrelevant as frick despite their large size when compared to Colonial empires.
    - Chinese and Persians should be A tier
    - Russian empire has been largely irrelevant but it age as wine

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I also forget to say that Akkadian empire should be A tier due being the first empire in history

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Colonialist empires, starting with Spanish and ending with British, were a joke, sea-based empires are trashy tier.
      Thats probably best argument I've seen towards fixing the list. We cant really compare say Spanish or Portugese empires or owning some undeveloped South America/africa lands colonising just the beaches for the most part as huge empires. The land their hand was either extremely undeveloped like in SA or barely controlled as with the case in Africa. Its laughable to put them in approximation with anything France/Germany/Austria had when just their European domains were much more powerful than entire empires of Spain, Portugal or even Britain for the most of it

      Mongols are overrated though. They discovered the wunderwaffle, rushed to annex everyone they could and then quickly collapsed. They would've been more impressive if they could just hold middle asia and russia for any duration of time

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Mongols are overrated though
        You can not overate an empire created by a single man in his lifetime based on will power and wit, an empire larger than colonial empires but composed by massive nations and empires more advanced than mongols themselves.

        Mongol empire is the equivalent of Tanzania, Kenya and Somalia uniting and then conquering all of Africa, then all Europe, Near east, Russia and India in 60 years.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >You can not overate an empire created by a single man in his lifetime based on will power and wit, an empire larger than colonial empires but composed by massive nations and empires more advanced than mongols themselves.
          >Mongol empire is the equivalent of Tanzania, Kenya and Somalia uniting and then conquering all of Africa, then all Europe, Near east, Russia and India in 60 years.
          when that empire has no real legacy and did not last long than yeah we can rate it low

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You are historically illiterate.Spain did have many european domains (and the most relevant of them Italy, wasn't inherited from the habsburg) and was far more powerful in and outside europe. Unironically have a nice day.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >was far more powerful in and outside europe
          than France or the HRE

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And even at their height, they were still weaker than france
          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Spanish_War_(1635%E2%80%931659)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Spain period of dominance lasted from 1500 to 1650, you posted the war that ended it dumb Black person.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Clearly ended for a reason. Net sum of their actions during the golden age was getting a lot of money from colonies, wasting it on war and then losing all the holdings they had. Most importantly one has to compare them to other powers at the time. They clearly were not the leader of great powers in the region, at most they were on the level. That does not make them a great empire. It's just a time when they weren't so shit

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Clearly ended for a reason
            Yeah like everyone do dumb Black person.
            >They clearly were not the leader of great powers in the region, at most they were on the level
            Yes they were dumb homosexual. The Tercios dominated completely european warfare until Rocroi, everyone who has read 2 things on the period know that.
            >That does not make them a great empire
            An empire that was the unchallenged hegemon for 1 century and a half on europe, america and even part of Asia, on land and sea is the very definition of a great power you stupid illiterate monkey.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >An empire that was the unchallenged hegemon for 1 century and a half on europe
            They lost like half of the wars against world powers like France. Maybe a bit less depending on how you count.

            On sea there were almost always getting extremely buttfricked by British navy, even despite of their armada. South africa net sum is worth about a 3rd of italy. In asia they had some islands. Be real.

            Most importantly, when comparing them to other world powers of the time, they continually fell off to unimaginable lows. UK, Germany, France and Russia are so much beyond them, its laughable to even consider Spain when all they did was colonise some jungles and not lose every single war like they did outside of their golden age

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >They lost like half of the wars against world powers like France. Maybe a bit less depending on how you count.
            lol
            rofl
            >On sea there were almost always getting extremely buttfricked by British navy, even despite of their armada
            lmao
            you clearly haven't read a single thing on the 16th and 17th century. You haven't even watched a fricking youtube video about it. Your opinion is worthless.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >some latinx absolutely seething when spain is brought up as the joke of all "great powers"
            Dont blame yourself for conceding your point. It's the way you were born

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >world powers like France
            >france in the early modern era was a "world power"
            we got ourselves a genius here

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >A lot of the worst takes I've ever heard all in one post
        Very nice.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Also, now that I remember it, colonial powers never ever defeated in their own a land empires by themselves. Germany would have basically won both world wars (despite French and Bongs bringing in mass scale resources and soldiers from Africa and Asia) if wasn't because America and Russians kept the whole fronts.

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    didnt realize that spain had a sawtooth saltire like Burgundy did. is that a hapsburg thing or what?

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Austrian empire deserves to be S tier. The habsburgs either directly or indirectly owned most of europe during the early modern era. The only ones who could even rival austria at this time were the French due to their centralization and abundant farmland.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Austrian empire
      you do know that's post 1804 Austria right?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Habsburgs are not Austria. Austria itself was utterly irrelevant in the early modern period. The Habsburg came from Spain and a lesser extent their burgundian domain

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Habsburg power came from*

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The Habsburg's power literally came from Austria, it is their oldest cohesive domain.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Austria was irrelevant. It was neither particularly rich (like the burgundian state) or powerful military (unlike spain). There's a reason people remember the Spanish habsburgs like Philip II or IV but don't give a shit about their cousins who ruled over Austria at the same period.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There's a reason people remember the Spanish habsburgs like Philip II or IV but don't give a shit about their cousins who ruled over Austria at the same period.
            Speak for yourself

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No I don't speak for myself. You have to be clinically insane to think austria had a tenth of the importance spain had in the early modern period.
            it would be like saying hanover was more relevant than in the 19th century.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Name me 10 Johannes Keplers from Spain!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            He wasn't austrian and political relevance has nothing to do with scientific accomplishment. Rome didn't produce a single scientific of note.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            we're still using their goddamned calendar

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Rome didn't produce a single scientific of note.
            Omegalul

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            name one

            >some latinx absolutely seething when spain is brought up as the joke of all "great powers"
            Dont blame yourself for conceding your point. It's the way you were born

            I'm spanish, not from Latin America. I'm not seething. You just clearly don't have the required knowledge to discuss this time period since both the assessment you made a wrong.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >name one
            and suddenly the room went silent

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >HRE
    >A

    stopped reading here.

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Uhhhh mostly objective list I think. I did not even know about quite a few of these empires; I confess that many I did know I have not studied.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Georgia above the Qing, Italy, Oman empire, Srivijaya, Fatimid or even Mamluks
      Yeah no

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >British Raj
    >an Empire
    I'm assuming the East India Company is supposed to be the stand in for the Raj because otherwise it makes no sense for a colony to be on there

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >british Raj in B
    Should be shit tier for poor administration

  35. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Austria was relevant enough for the Imperial title. From there they were able to become kings of Bohemia, Hungary and Spain. Without Austria: no Habsburgs as kings in all of Europe. Without Spain: no Habsburgs as kings in the med.

  36. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    some arab sailor sometime around 1000AD called the srivijaya empire one of the four most spectacular places in the world, alongside the byzantines, caliphate, and china. I don't know much about it but it might be more than "who?"-tier. as a professional musician and aggressive researcher of world music I can definitely tell you that javanese have an unusually sophisticated musical tradition compared to most of the world, I imagine they were probably extremely wealthy and had a high culture around that time due to their geographical position. they're the only culture I'm aware of that produced a harmonic musical theory independently of europe. always wondered what went on there but every time I've looked into it there's been almost zero information in the english language.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *