10 empires that came close to world domination

[kingblaze84]

Historians>>>>>>>amateurs on the internet lol

 

[kingblaze84]

From another history site.....
http://www.allabouthistory.org/mongol-empire.htm

Mongol Empire

The Mongol Empire was founded by Genghis Khan, a Mongol political and military leader who sometimes brutally conquered and united the Mongol tribes. Between AD 1206, when Temujin received his title as Genghis Khan (“Ruler”), and AD 1370, when the last emperor in China’s Yuan Dynasty died in exile, the Mongol “Khagan” (“Great Khans” or “Emperors”) established the largest contiguous empire in world history.

At its height, the Mongol Empire covered large parts of modern-day China, Mongolia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Moldova, South Korea, North Korea, and Kuwait. After the death of Genghis Khan in 1227, the Mongol Empire grew even larger under his son, Tushi, and grandson, Kublai Khan, who established the Yuan Dynasty in China through at least 22 legitimate sons.

--Only an amateur would say the Mongols didn't have a legit empire, Genghis Khan's relatives and associates held onto much of the empire and lands they held......smh at niggas trying to change history, the fucking nerve.

 

[The_Jackal]

How about you actually use critical thinking instead of following what you hear. For someone who is anti christian it's crazy you believe everything online. So how is a destabilized state an empire? By the very definition a destabilized power with no CENTRAL AUTHORITY cannot be an empire. Stay uneducated. Nobody changing history you simply lack knowledge of history, you lack knowledge of words and the meaning of words, most importantly you lack basic reading skills. Noone debated that they held power. Just that a destabilized state with no central authority is the literally opposite of the definition of an empire.

 

[The_Jackal]

How can a state that was constantly involved in power struggles be an empire? How can a state in which the khanates(since ik you don't know what that is basically refers to them as lords) have more power then the actual head of state be an empire? They were strong yes, they controlled alot of landmass yes, they weren't an empire.

Pick up a book for once and stop the simple Google searches

 

[The_Jackal]

Bout to gave my bachelor in early western civilizations so get that amateur shot out here

 

[kingblaze84]

How can a state that was constantly involved in power struggles be an empire? How can a state in which the khanates(since ik you don't know what that is basically refers to them as lords) have more power then the actual head of state be an empire? They were strong yes, they controlled alot of landmass yes, they weren't an empire.

Pick up a book for once and stop the simple Google searches

Let's test your reading skills right now......read the following, your definition of empire is narrow as fuck. An empire doesn't need to be under the control of one person, silly rabbit.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empire

Empire

definition (among several definitions)

A powerful and important enterprise or holding of large scope that is controlled by a single person, family, or group of associates



--Can you read the part where it lists family or a group of associates? Read that twice if you need to. There is a reason PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS, something you are not, consider the Mongolian empire a legit one. A group of Khans often had their own rules and power structures, but they usually claimed to be descended from Genghis Khan and claimed to be carrying on his legacy. Note the fact that these Khans often claimed to be carrying on the Genghis Khan legacy/dynasty. Did you forget Genghis Khan's empire was often in the hands of his family and close associates? There's a reason most historians disagree with you.

 

[kingblaze84]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Mongolica
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire

In the thirteenth century, Genghis Khan expanded the Mongol Empire to be the largest contiguous empire in the world. However, within two generations, the empire was separated into four discrete khanates under Genghis Khan's grandsons. One of them, Kublai Khan, conquered China and established the Yuan Dynasty with the imperial capital at Beijing. One family ruled the whole Eurasian land mass from the Pacific to the Adriatic and Baltic Seas. The emergence of the Pax Mongolica had significantly eased trade and commerce across Asia.[24][25]



--Some people didn't pay any attention in history class I see. Jackal, it seems you were one of those people. Read up and stop making a fool of yourself.

 

[The_Jackal]

How can a state that was constantly involved in power struggles be an empire? How can a state in which the khanates(since ik you don't know what that is basically refers to them as lords) have more power then the actual head of state be an empire? They were strong yes, they controlled alot of landmass yes, they weren't an empire.

Pick up a book for once and stop the simple Google searches

Let's test your reading skills right now......read the following, your definition of empire is narrow as fuck. An empire doesn't need to be under the control of one person, silly rabbit.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empire

Empire

definition (among several definitions)

A powerful and important enterprise or holding of large scope that is controlled by a single person, family, or group of associates



--Can you read the part where it lists family or a group of associates? Read that twice if you need to. There is a reason PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS, something you are not, consider the Mongolian empire a legit one. A group of Khans often had their own rules and power structures, but they usually claimed to be descended from Genghis Khan and claimed to be carrying on his legacy. Note the fact that these Khans often claimed to be carrying on the Genghis Khan legacy/dynasty. Did you forget Genghis Khan's empire was often in the hands of his family and close associates? There's a reason most historians disagree with you.

LOL you are such a fucking hypocrite. The sense that you used empire is a business sense not a nation.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empire

a group of nations or peoples ruled over by an emperor, empress, or other powerful sovereign or government:



Since you clearly cant read and skipped past it.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empire

a group of countries or regions that are controlled by one ruler or one goverment; especially : a group of countries ruled by an emperor or empress
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/empire

1An extensive group of states or countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or a sovereign state:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/empire

political unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations and ruled by a single supreme authority.

Like I said you are wrong. Stop with the bullshit and soak up game. After Genghis died and the Khanates pulled the empire into civil war fighting for their own power it stopped being an empire. Or are you going to pull up more misused definitions?

 

[kingblaze84]

How can a state that was constantly involved in power struggles be an empire? How can a state in which the khanates(since ik you don't know what that is basically refers to them as lords) have more power then the actual head of state be an empire? They were strong yes, they controlled alot of landmass yes, they weren't an empire.

Pick up a book for once and stop the simple Google searches

Let's test your reading skills right now......read the following, your definition of empire is narrow as fuck. An empire doesn't need to be under the control of one person, silly rabbit.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empire

Empire

definition (among several definitions)

A powerful and important enterprise or holding of large scope that is controlled by a single person, family, or group of associates



--Can you read the part where it lists family or a group of associates? Read that twice if you need to. There is a reason PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS, something you are not, consider the Mongolian empire a legit one. A group of Khans often had their own rules and power structures, but they usually claimed to be descended from Genghis Khan and claimed to be carrying on his legacy. Note the fact that these Khans often claimed to be carrying on the Genghis Khan legacy/dynasty. Did you forget Genghis Khan's empire was often in the hands of his family and close associates? There's a reason most historians disagree with you.

LOL you are such a fucking hypocrite. The sense that you used empire is a business sense not a nation.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empire

a group of nations or peoples ruled over by an emperor, empress, or other powerful sovereign or government:



Since you clearly cant read and skipped past it.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empire

a group of countries or regions that are controlled by one ruler or one goverment; especially : a group of countries ruled by an emperor or empress
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/empire

1An extensive group of states or countries ruled over by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or a sovereign state:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/empire

political unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations and ruled by a single supreme authority.

Like I said you are wrong. Stop with the bullshit and soak up game. After Genghis died and the Khanates pulled the empire into civil war fighting for their own power it stopped being an empire. Or are you going to pull up more misused definitions?

Yes the Khanates had their feuds and some civil wars down the line, but the Khanates always claimed to be descended from Genghis Khan and said they were carrying on his legacy. You do realize his sons and grandchildren, among other relatives, held the mantles of the empire after his death right? Even if there was some division in the years after Genghis died, his associates and family still had a ton of land and many paid tribute to them. The history books will continue to disagree with you, and you will have to live with that. Look at what Portland State University said about the fall of the Mongolian Empire.....again, Portland State University
http://quatr.us/centralasia/history/kublaikhan.htm

In 1328 AD, some people in China got sick with the bubonic plague. By 1347, the plague spread through the Mongol Empire, carried by traders and travelers and soldiers. The plague spread all through China, and all across Central Asia and West Asia, and then all across North Africa and Europe. Millions of people died. The Mongol Empire, already weakened by civil war, collapsed.



Historian facts>>>>>yours.

 

[kingblaze84]

The Roman Empire many times had conflicts in which an emperor was in conflict with another person who claimed to be an emperor, and the Roman Empire many times had ruling divisions as well. Doesn't mean they stopped being an empire.

 

[zzombie]

This nigga uses words to mean whatever the fuck he wants them to mean. Totally disregarding their actual meaning

 

[zzombie]

Thinking skills are very important

After the death of the second great Khan there was no mongol empire there were empires controlled by different sets of mongols.

So to say that there was a "mongol empire" in the strictest sense is wrong because there was no one central authority. There existed mongol governments but not A mongol government

 

[Ajackson17]

They are right bruh and the video says those who came close to world domination. They weren't in control and if they kept pushing further they would have fallen faster cause they were spread way too thin. They were barely an empire at best and crumbled into sovereign nations that did help and work together on occasions, but they didn't have to listen to each other.

 

[The_Jackal]

You're just ignorant. The definition is solid. If there is no central power there is no empire. Like I just said his children had no central authority. The khanates did as they please. You can try and change the word as much as you want it doesn't change the fact no central power no empire.

I doubt you even know Roman history but there was always a single emperor or senate who held complete control over the empire regardless if his throne was contested. Even during the crisis of the third centery. Even after Nero death. Even before Constantine united the empire. Shit even after its fall and the byzantine empire picked up the pieces. With the byzantine arguably the continuation of Rome.

Like I said keep posting articles that don't prove your point. There was no single head that was in control of all the khanates. That's a FACT. If there is no single head and each khanates held their own territory and installed their own ruled within those land then it shows they ARE NOT UNITED. If they are not united then it isn't an empire.

This is literally the same argument fir the Holy Roman empire being an Empire. It wasn't one and after genhis death this wasn't one.

@zzombie it's crazy how a man can twist words to fit whatever wrong view he has.

 

[The_Jackal]

Stop pulling up bullshit online and post any evidence that the khans were united in anyway. Like I said I actually study this that's how I know you don't know what the fuck you talking bout. You sure you not a Christian? Because you definitely just believe anything that you find on the Internet.

 

[Ajackson17]

Sometimes you need to check your ego at the door when it comes to scholarship. He is completely right when the article tells you there was no central government system or one person in power. If all the heads fighting over for control then no one is ruling shit.

 

[The_Jackal]

They are right bruh and the video says those who came close to world domination. They weren't in control and if they kept pushing further they would have fallen faster cause they were spread way too thin. They were barely an empire at best and crumbled into sovereign nations that did help and work together on occasions, but they didn't have to listen to each other.

I always wondered how far British could have gone if they keep America. I always assume that atleast for us black k Americans things would have been a little better since they outlaw slavery at the start of 1800s and we're actively shutting down slave traders

 

[kingblaze84]

Thinking skills are very important

After the death of the second great Khan there was no mongol empire there were empires controlled by different sets of mongols.

So to say that there was a "mongol empire" in the strictest sense is wrong because there was no one central authority. There existed mongol governments but not A mongol government

Kublai Khan consolidated most of the empire in 1264, defeating his relatives and other rivals. I have no problem admitting after Kublai Khan's death, the empire more or less fell apart.
https://www.quora.com/What-happened-to-the-Mongol-Empire-after-Genghis-Khan

With the death of Mongke, civil war ensued among his sons and nephews. Kublai Khan, son of Mongke, came out victorious and gained domination over the Mongol empire in 1264. He consolidated his empire in eastern china and tried invading south east Asia but was not very successful in it. Russia was annexed and there were gains in the middle east.



Kublai died in 1294. With his death the Mongol empire disintegrated into four states and started to decline.

 

[kingblaze84]

They are right bruh and the video says those who came close to world domination. They weren't in control and if they kept pushing further they would have fallen faster cause they were spread way too thin. They were barely an empire at best and crumbled into sovereign nations that did help and work together on occasions, but they didn't have to listen to each other.

Kublai Khan consolidated most of the empire in 1264, not sure if you knew that. He died in 1294.

 

[The_Jackal]

So all that only to admit you were wrong. But I'm the Internet amateur smh