At the time of the highest prosperity of the Roman Empire, its dominion extended over vast territories - their total area was about 6.51 million square kilometers. However, in the list of the largest empires in history, the Roman one occupies only the nineteenth place.

What do you think, which one is the first one?

The largest empire in the world in history

Mongolian

294 (21.8 % )

Russian

213 (15.8 % )

Spanish

48 (3.6 % )

british

562 (41.6 % )

Mongolian

118 (8.7 % )

Turkic Khaganate

18 (1.3 % )

Japanese

5 (0.4 % )

Arab Caliphate

18 (1.3 % )

Macedonian

74 (5.5 % )

Now we know the correct answer...

Millennia of human existence passed under the sign of wars and expansions. Great states arose, grew and collapsed, which changed (and some continue to change) the face of the modern world.

An empire is the most powerful type of state, where various countries and peoples are united under the rule of a single monarch (emperor). Let's take a look at the ten biggest empires that have ever appeared on the world stage. Oddly enough, but in our list you will not find either the Roman, or the Ottoman, or even the empire of Alexander the Great - history has seen more.

10. Arab Caliphate

Population: -

State area: - 6.7

Capital: 630-656 Medina / 656 - 661 Mecca / 661 - 754 Damascus / 754 - 762 Al-Kufa / 762 - 836 Baghdad / 836 - 892 Samarra / 892 - 1258 Baghdad

Beginning of domination: 632 g

Fall of the empire: 1258

The existence of this empire marked the so-called. The "golden era of Islam" - the period from the 7th to the 13th century AD. e. The caliphate was founded immediately after the death of the founder of the Muslim faith, Muhammad, in 632, and the Medina community founded by the prophet became its core. Centuries of Arab conquests increased the area of ​​the empire to 13 million square meters. km, covering territories in all three parts of the Old World. By the middle of the 13th century, the Caliphate, torn apart by internal conflicts, was so weakened that it was easily captured first by the Mongols and then by the Ottomans, the founders of another great Persian empire.

9. Japanese Empire

Population: 97,770,000

State area: 7.4 million km2

Capital: Tokyo

Beginning of reign: 1868

Fall of an empire: 1947

Japan is the only empire on the modern political map. Now this status is rather formal, but 70 years ago it was Tokyo that was the main center of imperialism in Asia. Japan - an ally of the Third Reich and fascist Italy - then tried to establish control over the western coast of the Pacific Ocean, sharing a vast front with the Americans. At this time, the peak of the territorial scope of the empire came, which controlled almost the entire maritime space and 7.4 million square meters. km of land from Sakhalin to New Guinea.

8. Portuguese Empire

Population: 50 million (480 BC) / 35 million (330 BC)

State area: - 10.4 million km2

Capital: Coimbra, Lisbon

Since the 16th century, the Portuguese have been looking for ways to break through the Spanish isolation in the Iberian Peninsula. In 1497, they opened a sea route to India, which marked the beginning of the growth of the Portuguese colonial empire. Three years earlier, the Tordesillas Treaty was concluded between the “sworn neighbors”, which actually divided the world known at that time between the two countries, on unfavorable last conditions for the Portuguese. But this did not stop them from collecting more than 10 million square meters. km of land, most of which was occupied by Brazil. The handover of Macau to the Chinese in 1999 ended Portugal's colonial history.

7. Turkic Khaganate

Area - 13 million km2

one of the largest ancient states in the history of mankind in Asia, created by a tribal union of the Turks (Turkuts) headed by rulers from the Ashina clan. During the period of greatest expansion (the end of the 6th century), it controlled the territories of China (Manchuria), Mongolia, Altai, East Turkestan, West Turkestan (Central Asia), Kazakhstan and the North Caucasus. In addition, Sasanian Iran, the Chinese states of Northern Zhou, Northern Qi were tributaries of the Kaganate since 576, and from the same year the Turkic Kaganate seized the North Caucasus and Crimea from Byzantium.

6. French Empire

Population: -

State area: 13.5 million square meters km

Capital: Paris

Beginning of reign: 1546

Fall of an empire: 1940

France became the third European power (after Spain and Portugal) to become interested in overseas territories. Starting from 1546 - the time of the founding of New France (now Quebec, Canada) - the formation of Francophonie in the world begins. Having lost the American opposition to the Anglo-Saxons, and also inspired by the conquests of Napoleon, the French occupied almost all of West Africa. In the middle of the twentieth century, the area of ​​the empire reached 13.5 million square meters. km, more than 110 million people lived in it. By 1962, most of the French colonies had become independent states.

Chinese Empire

5. Chinese Empire (Qing Empire)

Population: 383,100,000

State area: 14.7 million km2

Capital: Mukden (1636–1644), Beijing (1644–1912)

Beginning of reign: 1616

Fall of the empire: 1912

The most ancient empire of Asia, the cradle of oriental culture. The first Chinese dynasties ruled from the 2nd millennium BC. e., but a single empire was created only in 221 BC. e. During the reign of Qing - the last monarchical dynasty of the Middle Kingdom - the empire occupied a record area of ​​14.7 million square meters. km. This is 1.5 times more than that of the modern Chinese state, mainly due to Mongolia, now independent. In 1911, the Xinhai Revolution broke out, putting an end to the monarchy in China, turning the empire into a republic.

4. Spanish Empire

Population: 60 million

State area: 20,000,000 km2

Capital: Toledo (1492-1561) / Madrid (1561-1601) / Valladolid (1601-1606) / Madrid (1606-1898)

Fall of the empire: 1898

The period of Spain's world domination began with the voyages of Columbus, who opened up new horizons for Catholic missionary work and territorial expansion. In the 16th century, almost the entire Western Hemisphere was "at the feet" of the Spanish king with his "invincible armada". It was at this time that Spain was called “the country where the sun never sets”, because its possessions covered the seventh part of the land (about 20 million sq. Km) and almost half of the sea routes in all corners of the planet. The greatest empires of the Incas and Aztecs fell to the conquistadors, and in their place a predominantly Hispanic Latin America was formed.

3. Russian Empire

Population: 60 million

Population: 181.5 million (1916)

State area: 23,700,000 km2

Capital: St. Petersburg, Moscow

Fall of the empire: 1917

The largest continental monarchy in human history. Its roots reach the times of the Moscow principality, then the kingdom. In 1721, Peter I proclaimed the imperial status of Russia, which owned vast territories from Finland to Chukotka. At the end of the 19th century, the state reached its geographical peak: 24.5 million square meters. km, about 130 million inhabitants, over 100 ethnic groups and nationalities. At one time, Russian possessions were the lands of Alaska (until it was sold by the Americans in 1867), as well as part of California.

2. Mongol Empire

Population: more than 110,000,000 people (1279)

State area: 38,000,000 km2 (1279)

Capital: Karakorum, Khanbalik

Beginning of reign: 1206

Fall of the empire: 1368

The greatest empire of all times and peoples, whose meaning of existence was one - war. The great Mongolian state was formed in 1206 under the leadership of Genghis Khan, having grown over several decades to 38 million square meters. km, from the Baltic Sea to Vietnam, and at the same time killing every tenth inhabitant of the Earth. By the end of the 13th century, its uluses covered a quarter of the land and a third of the world's population, which then numbered almost half a billion people. The ethno-political framework of modern Eurasia was formed on the fragments of the empire.

1. British Empire

Population: 458,000,000 (approximately 24% of the world's population in 1922)

State area: 42.75 km2 (1922)

Capital London

Beginning of reign: 1497

Empire Fall: 1949 (1997)

The British Empire is the largest ever existing state in the history of mankind with colonies on all inhabited continents.

For 400 years of its formation, it has withstood the competition for world domination with other "colonial titans": France, Holland, Spain, Portugal. During its heyday, London controlled a quarter of the world's land (over 34 million square kilometers) on all inhabited continents, as well as vast expanses of the ocean. Formally, it still exists in the form of the Commonwealth, while countries such as Canada and Australia actually remain subject to the British crown.

The international status of the English language is the main legacy of Pax Britannica.

Something else interesting for you from history: remember, or for example. Here you are. maybe you didn't know what was and

The original article is on the website InfoGlaz.rf Link to the article from which this copy is made -

Incredible Facts

Throughout the history of mankind, we have seen how empires are born and go into oblivion, over decades, centuries and even millennia. If it is true that history repeats itself, then perhaps we can learn from the mistakes and better understand the accomplishments of the world's most enduring empires.

Empire is a difficult word to define. Although this term is very often thrown around, it is nevertheless often used in the wrong context and distorts the political location of the country. The simplest definition describes a political unit that exercises control over another political body. Basically, these are countries or groups of people that control the political decisions of a less powerful unit.

The term "hegemony" is often used along with empire, but they have significant differences, as well as the obvious differences between the concepts of "leader" and "hooligan". The hegemony works as an agreed set of international rules, while the empire produces and implements those same rules. Hegemony is the dominance of one group over other groups, however, requiring the consent of the majority in order for that ruling group to remain in power.

Which empires have lasted the longest in history, and what can we learn from them? Below, we look at these kingdoms of the past, how they formed, and the factors that ultimately led to their downfall.

10. Portuguese Empire

The Portuguese Empire is remembered for having one of the strongest navies the world has ever seen. A lesser known fact is that until 1999 she did not “leave” the face of the earth. The kingdom lasted for 584 years. It was the first global empire in history, operating across four continents, and began in 1415 when the Portuguese captured the North African Muslim city of Cueta. Expansion continued as they moved into Africa, India, Asia and America.

After World War II, decolonization efforts intensified in many areas, with many European countries "withdrawing" from their colonies around the world. It wasn't until 1999 that this happened to Portugal, when it finally gave up Macau in China, signaling the "end" of the empire.

The Portuguese empire was able to expand so much because of its excellent weapons, naval superiority, and the ability to quickly build ports for the trade in sugar, slaves and gold. She also had enough strength to conquer new nations and gain lands. But, as is the case with most empires throughout history, conquered areas eventually sought to reclaim their lands.

The Portuguese empire collapsed for several reasons, including international pressure and economic tensions.

9. Ottoman Empire

At the height of its power, the Ottoman Empire spanned three continents, encompassing a wide range of cultures, religions and languages. Despite these differences, the empire was able to flourish for 623 years, from 1299 to 1922.

The Ottoman Empire got its start as a small Turkish state after the weakened Byzantine Empire left the region. Osman I pushed the boundaries of his empire outward, relying on strong judicial, educational and military systems, as well as a unique method of transferring power. The empire continued to expand and eventually conquered Constantinople in 1453 and spread its influence deep into Europe and North Africa. The civil wars of the early 1900s immediately following World War I, as well as the Arab Revolt, signaled the beginning of the end. At the end of World War I, the Treaty of Sèvres divided much of the Ottoman Empire. The final point was the Turkish War of Independence, which resulted in the fall of Constantinople in 1922.

Inflation, competition and unemployment are cited as key factors in the demise of the Ottoman Empire. Each part of this massive empire was culturally and economically diverse, and their inhabitants ultimately wanted to break free.

8. Khmer Empire

Little is known about the Khmer Empire, however, its capital city of Angkor was said to be very impressive thanks in large part to Angkor Wat, one of the world's largest religious monuments built at the zenith of its power. The Khmer Empire began its existence in 802 AD, when Jayavarman II was proclaimed king of the region that currently belongs to the territory of Cambodia. 630 years later, in 1432, the empire came to an end.

Some of what we know about this empire comes from stone frescoes found in the region, and some information comes from the Chinese diplomat Zhou Daguan, who traveled to Angkor in 1296 and published a book about his experiences. Almost all the time of the existence of the empire, it tried to capture more and more new territories. Angkor was the main home of the nobility in the second period of the empire. As Khmer power began to wane, neighboring civilizations began to fight for control of Angkor.

There are many theories as to why the empire collapsed. Some believe that the king converted to Buddhism, which led to the loss of workers, the degeneration of the water system, and, ultimately, very poor crops. Others claim that the Thai kingdom of Sukhothai conquered Angkor in the 1400s. Another theory suggests that the last straw was the transfer of power to the city of Oudong (Oudong), while Angkor remained abandoned.

7. Ethiopian Empire

Considering the time of the Ethiopian Empire, we know surprisingly little about it. Ethiopia and Liberia were the only African countries that managed to resist the European "scramble for Africa". The long existence of the empire began in 1270, when the Solomonid dynasty overthrew the Zagwe dynasty, declaring that it was they who owned the rights to this land, as King Solomon had bequeathed. Since then, the dynasty has subsequently evolved into an empire by bringing together new civilizations under its dominion.

All this continued until 1895, when Italy declared war on the empire, and then the problems began. In 1935, Benito Mussolini ordered his soldiers to invade Ethiopia, resulting in the war raging there for seven months, with Italy declared the winner of the war. From 1936 to 1941, the Italians ruled the country.

The Ethiopian empire did not greatly expand its borders and did not exhaust its resources, as we saw in previous examples. Rather, Ethiopia's resources have become more powerful, in particular, we are talking about huge coffee plantations. Civil wars contributed to the weakening of the empire, however, at the head of everything, nevertheless, was the desire of Italy to expand, which led to the fall of Ethiopia.

6. Kanem Empire

We know very little about the Kanem empire and how its people lived, most of our knowledge comes from a text document discovered in 1851 called Girgam. Over time, Islam became their main religion, however, it is believed that the introduction of religion could cause internal struggles in the early years of the empire. The Kanem Empire was established around the year 700 and lasted until 1376. It was located in what is now Chad, Libya and part of Nigeria.

According to the document found, the Zaghawa people founded their capital in 700 in the city of Njime (N "jimi). The history of the empire is divided between two dynasties - Duguwa and Sayfawa (was the driving force that brought Islam). Its expansion continues and during the period when the king declared holy war, or jihad, on all the surrounding tribes.

The military system designed to facilitate jihad was based on state principles of hereditary nobility, in which soldiers received part of the lands they conquered, while the lands were listed as theirs for many years to come, even their sons could dispose of them. Such a system led to the outbreak of civil war, which weakened the empire and made it vulnerable to attack from outside enemies. Bulala's invaders were able to quickly seize control of the capital and eventually take control of the empire in 1376.

The lesson of the Kanem empire shows how wrong decisions provoke internal conflict, as a result of which once powerful people become defenseless. This development is repeated throughout history.

5. Holy Roman Empire

The Holy Roman Empire was seen as the revival of the Western Roman Empire, and it was also seen as a political counterweight to the Roman Catholic Church. Its name, however, comes from the fact that the emperor was chosen by the electors, but he was crowned by the pope in Rome. The empire lasted from 962 to 1806 and occupied a fairly vast territory, which is now Central Europe, first of all, it is most of Germany.

The empire began when Otto I was proclaimed King of Germany, however, he later became known as the first Holy Roman Emperor. The empire consisted of 300 different territories, however, after the Thirty Years' War in 1648, it was fragmented, thus the seeds of independence were planted.

In 1792 there was an uprising in France. By 1806, Napoleon Bonaparte forced the last Holy Roman Emperor, Franz II, to abdicate, after which the empire was renamed the Confederation of the Rhine. Like the Ottoman and Portuguese empires, the Holy Roman Empire was made up of various ethnic groups and smaller kingdoms. Ultimately, these kingdoms' desire for independence led to the collapse of the empire.

4. Silla Empire

Little is known of the beginnings of the Silla empire, however, by the sixth century it was a highly sophisticated society based on descent, in which lineage determined everything from the clothes that a person could wear to the work that a person was allowed to do. . While this system helped the empire initially acquire large amounts of land, it was also what ultimately led to its decline.

The Silla Empire was born in 57 BC. and occupied the territory that currently belongs to North and South Korea. Kin Park Hyokgeose was the first ruler of the empire. During his reign, the empire constantly expanded, conquering more and more kingdoms on the Korean peninsula. Eventually, a monarchy was formed. The Chinese Tang Dynasty and the Silla Empire were at war in the seventh century, however, the dynasty was defeated.

A century of civil war among high-ranking families, as well as among conquered kingdoms, made the empire doomed. Eventually, in 935 AD, the empire ceased to exist and became part of the new state of Goryeo, which was at war with in the 7th century. Historians are not aware of the exact circumstances that led to the demise of the Silla Empire, however, the general view is that neighboring countries were unhappy with the empire's continued expansion through the Korean Peninsula. Numerous theories agree that the lesser kingdoms struck in order to gain sovereignty.

3. Republic of Venice

The pride of the Venetian Republic was its massive navy, which allowed it to quickly prove its power throughout Europe and the Mediterranean, conquering such important historical cities as Cyprus and Crete. The Venetian Republic lasted an amazing 1100 years, from 697 to 1797. It all started when the Western Roman Empire fought Italy and when the Venetians declared Paolo Lucio Anafesto their duke. The empire went through several significant changes, however, it gradually expanded to become what is now known as the Venetian Republic, at odds with the Turks and the Ottoman Empire, among others.

A large number of wars significantly weakened the defensive forces of the empire. The city of Piedmont soon submitted to France, and Napoleon Bonaparte seized part of the empire. When Napoleon issued an ultimatum, Doge Ludovico Manin surrendered in 1797, and Napoleon took control of Venice.

The Republic of Venice is a classic example of how an empire that stretches over vast distances is unable to defend its capital. Unlike other empires, it was not civil wars that killed it, but wars with neighbors. The once invincible once invincible Venetian navy, highly valued, has spread too far and is unable to defend its own empire.

2. Kush Empire

The Kush Empire existed from about 1070 BC. before 350 AD and occupied the territory that currently belongs to the Republic of Sudan. Throughout its long history, very little information has survived about the political structure of the region, however, there is evidence of monarchies in the last years of existence. However, the Kush Empire ruled several small countries in the region, while managing to maintain power. The empire's economy was heavily dependent on the trade in iron and gold.

Some evidence suggests that the empire was under attack from the desert tribes, while other scholars believe that overdependence on iron led to deforestation, causing people to "disperse".

Other empires fell because they exploited their own people or neighboring countries, however, the deforestation theory suggests that the Kush empire fell because it destroyed its own lands. Both the rise and fall of an empire were fatally linked to the same industry.

1. Eastern Roman Empire

The Roman Empire is not just one of the most famous in history, it is also the longest lasting empire. She went through several eras, but, in fact, lasted from 27 BC. before 1453 AD - a total of 1480 years. The republics that preceded it were destroyed by civil wars, and Julius Caesar became a dictator. The empire expanded into present-day Italy and much of the Mediterranean region. The empire was powerful, but the emperor Diocletian in the third century “introduced” a key factor that ensured the long-term success and prosperity of the empire. He determined that two emperors could govern, thus easing the stress of capturing large amounts of territory. Thus, the foundations were laid for the possibility of the existence of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires.

The Western Roman Empire dissolved in 476 when German troops rebelled and deposed Romulus Augustus from the imperial throne. The Eastern Roman Empire continued to prosper after 476, becoming better known as the Byzantine Empire.

Class conflicts led to the civil war of 1341-1347, which not only reduced the number of small states that were part of the Byzantine Empire, but also allowed the short-lived Serbian Empire to rule for a short period of time in some territories of the Byzantine Empire. Social upheaval and plague further weakened the kingdom. Combined with the growing unrest in the empire, plague and social unrest, it eventually fell when the Ottoman Empire conquered Constantinople in 1453.

Despite the strategy of the co-ruler Diocletian, which undoubtedly greatly increased the "lifespan" of the Roman Empire, it suffered the same fate as other empires, whose massive expansion eventually provoked various ethnic peoples to fight for sovereignty.

These empires lasted the longest in history, but each had its own weaknesses, be it the use of land or people, none of the empires was able to contain social unrest caused by class divisions, unemployment or lack of resources.

September 19, 2006
"Foreign Policy", USA
http://www.inosmi.ru/translation/230004.html

The imperial states of the mid-20th century largely dug their own graves.

Empires are the locomotives of history. But in the last century they turned out to be very short-lived - not a single empire saw the beginning of a new century. There are no empires on the political map today, at least not officially. But this situation may soon change if the US - and even China - follow the call of their imperial destiny. Will they be able to avoid the fate that befell their predecessors?

The course of events in the world has always been determined by empires, not by nation-states. What we call the history of mankind is in many ways a chronicle of the deeds of 50-70 empires that at different times ruled over vast expanses and many peoples in different regions of the planet. However, over time, their "life span" began to decline. Compared to their predecessors in antiquity, the Middle Ages, and modern times, the empires of the past century have been surprisingly short-lived. The shortening of the "life cycle" of empires has a profound effect on the events of our day.

Officially, there are no empires today - there are only 190-something "ordinary" states. However, the ghosts of past empires still roam the planet. Regional conflicts on different continents - from Central Africa and the Middle East to Central America and the Far East are easily - and often demagogically - explained by the sins of former empires: the border was drawn wrong there, interethnic discord was sown here, following the principle of "divide and rule".

Moreover, in many influential states of today's world, the features of the empires that gave birth to them are unmistakably guessed. Take the Russian Federation: Russians make up less than 80% of its population. And Great Britain today is essentially the "empire of the British." Modern Italy and Germany were born not of national movements, but of the expansion of Piedmont and Prussia. The legacy of empires is even more evident outside of Europe. Today's India, for example, was largely shaped by the Mughal era and British colonial rule. (One Indian officer once said to me: "The Indian army today is more 'English' than the British army." As we drove through the military camp in Madras, I realized that he was right: hundreds of infantrymen wrapped in khakis at the sight of an officer were stretched string and saluted). Today's China is a direct descendant of the Middle Kingdom. In the New World, the legacy of empires is visible from Canada in the North to Argentina in the South: in Canada, the British monarch remains the official head of state, and the Falklands still belong to England.

In a word, in today's world, former empires or their colonies occupy the same place as nation-states. Even the organizations set up in 1945 to reshape the international system bear a clear imperial imprint. Doesn't the institution of permanent members of the UN Security Council resemble the "gentlemen's club" of former empires? And what are "humanitarian interventions" if not a more politically correct formulation of the concept of "civilizing mission" of the former empires of the West?

How long do empires "live"?

It is generally accepted that the "life cycle" of empires, great powers and civilizations is subject to certain predictable patterns. However, what is most striking in the empires of the past is the enormous difference not only in the size of their possessions, but also in the duration of their existence. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that the "life" of modern empires is much shorter than that of their ancient and medieval predecessors.

Take at least three Roman empires. The Western Roman Empire came into being in 27 BC when Octavian named himself Caesar Augustus and became emperor by all but the title itself. Its end came with the death of Emperor Theodosius in 395, when Constantinople officially became the "rival" capital of the Roman state: thus, it lasted 422 years. At the same moment, the Eastern Roman Empire was born, which lasted 1058 years - until the defeat of Byzantium by the Ottoman Turks in 1453. The Holy Roman Empire existed from 800, when Charlemagne was crowned, until 1806, when Napoleon scored in her coffin last nail. Thus, the "average life expectancy" for the Roman empires is 829 years.

Such calculations, for all their approximateness, make it possible to compare the "life cycles" of various empires. Three Roman empires in this sense turned out to be "long-livers". Thus, the average for the Middle Eastern empires (Assyria, the Abbasid states, the Ottoman Empire) is a little more than 400 years, in Egypt and Eastern Europe, empires existed on average for 350 years, for China - if we single out each of the main dynasties into a separate "imperial cycle" - a similar figure is more than 300 years. The various empires in Persia, India and Western Europe "lived" generally for 200 to 300 years.

After the capture of Constantinople, the Ottoman Empire undoubtedly lasted the longest - 469 years. The Eastern European empires of the Habsburgs and the Romanovs lasted more than three centuries. The Mughals ruled most of what is now India for 235 years. The reign of the Safavid dynasty in Persia lasted almost as long.

The exact dating of the "sea" empires with metropolises in Western Europe is a more difficult task, since there are different points of view regarding the chronology of their existence. However, it is safe to say that the British, Dutch, French, and Spanish empires each lasted roughly 300 years, and the Portuguese nearly 500.

The empires that emerged in the 20th century, on the other hand, had a relatively short "life cycle". The Bolshevik USSR lasted less than 70 years (1922-1991) - by historical standards, not for long; however, the People's Republic of China has not yet overcome even this milestone. The Japanese colonial empire, which began with the annexation of Taiwan in 1895, barely lasted half a century. Hitler's Third Reich turned out to be the most short-lived of the empires of the 20th century: its expansion beyond the borders of Germany began in 1938, but by the beginning of 1945 it had been expelled from all the occupied territories. Formally, the Third Reich lasted 12 years, but the empire in the true sense - i.e. a state governing other peoples - he was only half of this term. Only Benito Mussolini turned out to be an even more unlucky "imperialist" than Hitler.

Why were the empires of the 20th century so fragile? The answer lies in part in their desire for unprecedented centralization of power, economic control, and social homogeneity.

The new empires that arose after the First World War were not satisfied with the efficient but improvised administrative system that characterized traditional colonial empires, including the indiscriminate mixture of imperial and local laws and the delegation of certain powers and status to certain indigenous ethnic groups in the colonies. From the nation-state builders of the 19th century, they inherited an insatiable thirst for uniformity; as a result, these entities are more likely to be defined as "imperial states" rather than classical empires. The new empires cast aside traditional religious and legal norms that limited state violence. They stubbornly built a new hierarchical system on the site of existing social structures, and with pleasure broke the old political institutions. But most importantly, they turned cruelty into the highest virtue. In pursuit of their goals, they waged "total" wars directed not only against armed and specially trained representatives of the enemy state, but also against entire social or ethnic groups. Here is one fact typical of the new generation of "candidates for emperor": Hitler accused the British of being "soft" towards the Indian national movement.

The imperial states of the mid-20th century largely dug their own graves. The Germans and Japanese asserted their power over other peoples with such cruelty that they completely undermined the possibility of cooperation with the local population and created the prerequisites for the deployment of the Resistance Movement. It was a reckless policy, for many of those whom the Axis "liberated" from their former rulers (Stalin in Eastern Europe, European empires in Asia) initially welcomed the new masters. At the same time, the territorial ambitions of these imperial states were so limitless - and their overall strategy is so illusory - that they very quickly spawned an invincible coalition of rival empires - Britain, the USA and the USSR.

Why are we fighting

An empire cannot last long if it does not have long-term support among the local population, or it will allow rival empires to unite in a hostile coalition that is superior in strength. The crucial question is this: Has the behavior of today's world powers changed compared to their predecessor empires?

Publicly, the leaders of the American and Chinese republics deny that they have any imperial aspirations. Both states were born in the course of revolutions, and have a long "anti-imperialist" tradition. But at some point the mask is reset. Thus, the postcards sent to friends on Christmas Day 2003 by US Vice President Dick Cheney contained an eloquent quote from Benjamin Franklin: "If the sparrow does not fall to the ground, so that the Lord does not notice it, is it possible for an empire to arise without His help ?". In 2004, a senior adviser to President Bush remarked to journalist Ron Suskind, "We are an empire now, and by our actions we are shaping a man-made reality... We are moving history." Perhaps similar thoughts are coming to Chinese leaders. But even if this does not happen, nothing prevents the republic from acting in practice "imperially", continuing to swear allegiance to the republican virtues.

By historical standards, the United States is still a very young empire. Its expansion on the American continent itself in the 19th century was overtly imperialist. However, the relative ease with which the original federation of states absorbed vast but sparsely populated territories prevented the formation of a truly imperial mentality and did not create any problems for the existence of republican political institutions. On the contrary, the overseas expansion of the United States, the beginning of which can be considered the Spanish-American War of 1898, was accompanied by much greater difficulties, and it was for this reason that the specter of the transformation of the presidential chair into the "imperial throne" more than once appeared on the horizon during this period. Leaving aside American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands, which became permanent US dependencies, US interventions abroad generally did not last long.

In the 20th century, the US occupied Panama for 74 years, the Philippines for 48 years, Palau for 47 years, Micronesia and the Marshall Islands for 39 years, Haiti for 19 years, and the Dominican Republic for 8 years. The official occupation of West Germany and Japan after World War II lasted 10 and 7 years, respectively, although American troops are still deployed in these countries, as in South Korea. In addition, starting in 1965, an impressive American contingent was sent to South Vietnam, but by 1973 it was withdrawn.

This historical experience reinforces the popular belief that the US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan after the end of George W. Bush's presidency will not last long. Today's empires - especially if they do not recognize themselves as such - are fragile, but for special reasons that distinguish our era from previous ones.

In the case of the American empire, its ephemeral nature is not primarily due to the hostility of the conquered peoples or the threat from the rival powers (which caused the collapse of other empires of the 20th century), but to internal political restrictions. These restrictions appear in three main forms. The first can be called the "deficit of troops." When Britain successfully put down a major uprising in Iraq in 1920, it deployed a sizeable contingent, with one British soldier for every 23 inhabitants. Today, the United States is clearly unable to provide such a balance of power: there are 210 Iraqis for one American soldier.

The problem, contrary to popular belief, is not purely demographic. There are plenty of healthy young people in the United States (there are many times the number of men aged 15 to 24 in Iraq or Afghanistan). The fact is that the size of the US armed forces is a very small proportion of the population - 0.5%. In addition, only a small, most trained part of these armed forces takes part in hostilities in overseas theaters.

Soldiers from the elite units are too cherished not to hesitate to send them to their deaths. And it's not easy to replace the dead. Every time I read in the newspapers about the tragic death of another American soldier in battle, the lines of Rudyard Kipling, the greatest of British "imperial" poets, come to mind:

Random fight in Afghanistan
In the gorge of the mountains, a damp dawn,
In two thousand education
Dumped Jezayl for five coins -
The beauty and pride of the squadron
Shot like a crow in the saddle.
["Arithmetic of the Afghan border", translated by F. Tolstoy]

The second deterrent for the American "unofficial" empire is the US budget deficit. The cost of the war in Iraq has turned out to be much more than the administration had predicted: since the invasion began in 2003, it has already amounted to $290 billion. In relation to the volume of US GDP, this figure does not look so impressive - only 2.5%, but the treasury was unable to allocate more funds for the accelerated post-war reconstruction of Iraq, and this could have prevented a civil war flaring up in the country. Other priority spending - such as funding the government's Medicare obligations - has prevented the Marshall Plan for the Middle East from being realized as some Iraqis hoped for.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the American public is not enthusiastic about imperial politics. The empires of the past had no difficulty securing public support for even the most prolonged military conflicts. Their descendant - the United States - has clearly lost such skills. A year and a half after the invasion of Iraq, the majority of American voters, according to Gallup polls, considered it a mistake. For comparison, disappointment in the Vietnam War reached the same proportions only in August 1968 - when three years had passed since the introduction of a large American contingent into the country, and US losses in killed were approaching 30,000 people.

There are many hypotheses designed to explain the shortening of the "life cycle" of empires in our era. Some argue that the ubiquity of the news media makes would-be "emperors" no longer able to secretly abuse power. Others insist that advanced military technology no longer gives the United States an undeniable advantage: homemade land mines - like the primitive "five-penny" Jezale guns in Kipling's time - reduce it to zero, since the most powerful and cutting-edge weapons are often simply unsuitable for fighting guerrillas.

However, the real reasons for the fragility - and indeed the "unofficial" itself - of modern empires are not connected with this. Whether we like it or not, empires become the driving force of history, as this format allows for economies of scale. Thus, most nation-states can put under arms only a limited number of people. The empire, on the other hand, has more "freedom" in this regard: one of its most important functions is to mobilize and equip powerful armed forces consisting of representatives of many peoples, as well as collect taxes and provide loans to finance them - again supported by the resources of numerous colonies.

But why are these wars needed at all? Again, the answer has to do with economics. Among the "selfish" goals of imperial expansion is the vital need to ensure the security of the metropolis by defeating external enemies, replenishing the treasury through taxes and other payments levied on conquered peoples, and, of course, material "trophies" - new lands for colonization, raw materials , precious metals. In order to justify the expense of conquering and colonizing new lands, an empire must generally obtain all of these resources at lower prices than is possible through free barter with independent peoples and other empires.

At the same time, the empire often provides its citizens with "public goods" - i.e. benefits that extend not only to the colonialists themselves, but also to the conquered peoples - and third countries too. It could be peace and order in the Pax Romana sense, increased trade and investment, improved education (sometimes, but not always, religious conversion), or improved material living conditions.

Imperial rule rests not only on bayonets. Not only soldiers, but also civil servants, settlers, public organizations, businessmen and local elites in various ways ensure the implementation of the decisions of the center on the periphery. Moreover, the benefits of an empire extend beyond its rulers and their "clients." Colonists from low-income sections of the population of the metropolis also often enjoy its benefits. Even for those who do not go overseas, the victories of the Imperial legions in foreign lands become a source of pride. The beneficiaries of the empire often include the local elites in the colonies.

Thus, an empire arises and exists if, in the eyes of the imperialists themselves, the benefits of ruling other peoples exceed the associated costs, and in the eyes of the conquered peoples themselves, the benefits of subjugation to a foreign power outweigh the "costs" associated with resisting the colonialists. Indirectly, in such calculations, there is also a "lost profit" in the case of transferring power over a particular territory to another empire.

With all this in mind, today the costs of governing Iraq and Afghanistan seem "excessive" to most Americans, the benefits dubious at best, and no rival empire is able or willing to try their hand there. And because America's republican institutions, though under pressure, remain intact, today's United States bears little resemblance to 1st-century Rome. And the current president, although he seeks to expand the powers of the executive branch, is not drawn to Octavian.

However, all this could change. On our increasingly overpopulated planet, where sooner or later there will inevitably be a shortage of certain types of raw materials, all the main prerequisites for imperial rivalry remain. Look at the energy with which China has recently pursued "special relations" with resource-rich countries in Africa and other regions. Or ask yourself the question: even if "neo-isolationism" prevails in America, how long will it be able to withdraw itself from events in the Muslim world in the face of new attacks by Islamist terrorists?

Let's admit that today empires are not only embarrassed to be called such, but they are not in "demand" either. However, the experience of history suggests that tomorrow the pendulum of the balance of power may again swing in their favor.

The Ottoman Empire arose in 1299 in the northwest of Asia Minor and lasted 624 years, having managed to conquer many peoples and become one of the greatest powers in the history of mankind.

From the spot to the quarry

The position of the Turks at the end of the 13th century looked unpromising, if only because of the presence of Byzantium and Persia in the neighborhood. Plus the sultans of Konya (the capital of Lycaonia - regions in Asia Minor), depending on which, albeit formally, the Turks were.

However, all this did not prevent Osman (1288-1326) from expanding and strengthening his young state. By the way, by the name of their first sultan, the Turks began to be called the Ottomans.
Osman was actively engaged in the development of internal culture and carefully treated someone else's. Therefore, many Greek cities located in Asia Minor preferred to voluntarily recognize his supremacy. Thus, they "killed two birds with one stone": they both received protection and preserved their traditions.

Osman's son Orkhan I (1326-1359) brilliantly continued his father's work. Declaring that he was going to unite all the faithful under his rule, the Sultan set off to conquer not the countries of the East, which would be logical, but the western lands. And Byzantium was the first to stand in his way.

By this time, the empire was in decline, which the Turkish Sultan took advantage of. Like a cold-blooded butcher, he "chopped off" area after area from the Byzantine "body". Soon the entire northwestern part of Asia Minor came under the rule of the Turks. They also established themselves on the European coast of the Aegean and Marmara Seas, as well as the Dardanelles. And the territory of Byzantium was reduced to Constantinople and its environs.

Subsequent sultans continued the expansion of Eastern Europe, where they successfully fought against Serbia and Macedonia. And Bayazet (1389-1402) was "marked" by the defeat of the Christian army, which King Sigismund of Hungary led on a crusade against the Turks.

From defeat to triumph

Under the same Bayazet, one of the most severe defeats of the Ottoman army happened. The Sultan personally opposed Timur's army and in the Battle of Ankara (1402) he was defeated, and he himself was taken prisoner, where he died.
The heirs by hook or by crook tried to ascend the throne. The state was on the verge of collapse due to internal unrest. Only under Murad II (1421-1451) did the situation stabilize, and the Turks were able to regain control of the lost Greek cities and conquer part of Albania. The Sultan dreamed of finally cracking down on Byzantium, but did not have time. His son, Mehmed II (1451-1481), was destined to become the killer of the Orthodox empire.

On May 29, 1453, the hour of X came for Byzantium. The Turks besieged Constantinople for two months. Such a short time was enough to break the inhabitants of the city. Instead of everyone taking up arms, the townspeople simply prayed to God for help, not leaving churches for days. The last emperor, Constantine Palaiologos, asked for help from the Pope, but he demanded in return the unification of churches. Konstantin refused.

Perhaps the city would have held out even if not for the betrayal. One of the officials agreed to the bribe and opened the gate. He did not take into account one important fact - the Turkish Sultan, in addition to the female harem, also had a male one. That's where the comely son of a traitor got.

The city fell. The civilized world has stopped. Now all the states of both Europe and Asia have realized that the time has come for a new superpower - the Ottoman Empire.

European campaigns and confrontations with Russia

The Turks did not think to stop there. After the death of Byzantium, no one blocked their way to rich and unfaithful Europe, even conditionally.
Soon, Serbia was annexed to the empire (except for Belgrade, but the Turks would capture it in the 16th century), the Duchy of Athens (and, accordingly, most of all of Greece), the island of Lesbos, Wallachia, and Bosnia.

In Eastern Europe, the territorial appetites of the Turks intersected with those of Venice. The ruler of the latter quickly enlisted the support of Naples, the Pope and Karaman (Khanate in Asia Minor).

The confrontation lasted 16 years and ended with the complete victory of the Ottomans. After that, no one prevented them from "getting" the remaining Greek cities and islands, as well as annexing Albania and Herzegovina. The Turks were so carried away by the expansion of their borders that they successfully attacked even the Crimean Khanate.

Panic broke out in Europe. Pope Sixtus IV began to make plans for the evacuation of Rome, and at the same time hastened to announce a Crusade against the Ottoman Empire. Only Hungary responded to the call. In 1481, Mehmed II died, and the era of great conquests ended temporarily.
In the 16th century, when internal unrest in the empire subsided, the Turks again directed their weapons at their neighbors. First there was a war with Persia. Although the Turks won it, the territorial acquisitions were insignificant.

After success in North African Tripoli and Algiers, Sultan Suleiman invaded Austria and Hungary in 1527 and laid siege to Vienna two years later. It was not possible to take it - bad weather and mass diseases prevented it.

As for relations with Russia, for the first time the interests of states clashed in Crimea.
The first war took place in 1568 and ended in 1570 with the victory of Russia. Empires fought each other for 350 years (1568 - 1918) - one war fell on average for a quarter of a century.
During this time, there were 12 wars (including the Azov, Prut campaign, Crimean and Caucasian fronts during the First World War). And in most cases, the victory remained with Russia.

Dawn and sunset of the Janissaries

In 1365, on the personal order of Sultan Murad I, the Janissary infantry was formed.
It was completed by Christians (Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs, and so on) at the age of eight to sixteen years. Thus, devshirme worked - a blood tax - which was imposed on the unbelieving peoples of the empire. It is interesting that at first the life of the Janissaries was quite difficult. They lived in monasteries-barracks, they were forbidden to start a family and any household.
But gradually the Janissaries from the elite branch of the military began to turn into a highly paid burden for the state. In addition, these troops were less and less likely to take part in hostilities.

The beginning of decomposition was laid in 1683, when, along with Christian children, Muslims began to be taken as Janissaries. Wealthy Turks sent their children there, thereby solving the issue of their successful future - they could make a good career.

It was the Muslim Janissaries who began to start families and engage in crafts, as well as trade. Gradually, they turned into a greedy, impudent political force that interfered in state affairs and participated in the overthrow of objectionable sultans.

The agony continued until 1826, when Sultan Mahmud II abolished the Janissaries.

The death of the Ottoman Empire

Frequent troubles, inflated ambitions, cruelty and constant participation in any wars could not but affect the fate of the Ottoman Empire. The 20th century turned out to be especially critical, in which Turkey was increasingly torn apart by internal contradictions and the separatist mood of the population. Because of this, the country fell behind the West in technical terms, so it began to lose the once conquered territories.

The fateful decision for the empire was its participation in the First World War. The allies defeated the Turkish troops and staged a division of its territory. On October 29, 1923, a new state appeared - the Republic of Turkey. Mustafa Kemal became its first president (later, he changed his surname to Atatürk - "father of the Turks"). Thus ended the history of the once great Ottoman Empire.

Empire- when one person (monarch) has power over a vast territory inhabited by numerous peoples of different nationalities. This ranking is based on the influence, longevity and power of various empires. The list is based on the fact that an empire should, most of the time, be ruled by an emperor or a king, this excludes the modern so-called empires - the United States and the Soviet Union. Below is a ranking of the ten greatest empires in the world.

At the height of its power (XVI-XVII), the Ottoman Empire was located on three continents at once, controlling most of Southeast Europe, Western Asia and North Africa. It consisted of 29 provinces and numerous vassal states, some of which were later absorbed into the empire. The Ottoman Empire has been at the center of interaction between the Eastern and Western worlds for six centuries. In 1922, the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist.

The Umayyad Caliphate was the second of the four Islamic Caliphates (system of government) established after the death of Muhammad. The empire under the rule of the Umayyad dynasty covered more than five million square kilometers, making it one of the largest in the world, as well as the largest Arab-Muslim empire ever established in history.

Persian Empire (Achaemenid)

The Persian Empire basically unified all of Central Asia, which consisted of many different cultures, kingdoms, empires and tribes. It was the largest empire in ancient history. At the peak of its power, the empire covered about 8 million square kilometers.

The Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire was part of the Roman Empire during the Middle Ages. The permanent capital and civilizational center of the Byzantine Empire was Constantinople. During its existence (more than a thousand years), the empire remained one of the most powerful economic, cultural and military forces in Europe despite setbacks and loss of territory, especially during the Roman-Persian and Byzantine-Arab wars. The Empire received a mortal blow in 1204 on the Fourth Crusade.

The Han Dynasty is considered a golden age in Chinese history in terms of scientific advancement, technological progress, economic, cultural and political stability. Even to this day, most Chinese call themselves the Han people. Today, the Han people are considered the largest ethnic group in the world. The dynasty ruled China for nearly 400 years.

The British Empire covered more than 13 million square kilometers, which is about a quarter of the earth's landmass of our planet. The population of the empire was approximately 480 million people (approximately one-fourth of humanity). The British Empire is by far one of the most powerful empires that has ever existed in human history.

In the Middle Ages, the Holy Roman Empire was considered the "superpower" of its time. It consisted of eastern France, all of Germany, northern Italy, and part of western Poland. It was officially dissolved on August 6, 1806, after which there appeared: Switzerland, Holland, the Austrian Empire, Belgium, the Prussian Empire, the Principalities of Liechtenstein, the Confederation of the Rhine and the first French Empire.

The Russian Empire existed from 1721 until the Russian Revolution in 1917. She was the heir to the kingdom of Russia, and the forerunner of the Soviet Union. The Russian Empire was the third largest of the ever-existing states, second only to the British and Mongolian empires.

It all started when Temujin (later known as Genghis Khan, considered one of the most brutal rulers in history) vowed in his youth to bring the world to its knees. The Mongol Empire was the largest adjacent empire in human history. The capital of the state was the city of Karakoram. The Mongols were fearless and ruthless warriors, but they had little experience in managing such a vast territory, which caused the Mongol Empire to quickly fall.

Ancient Rome made a great contribution to the development of law, art, literature, architecture, technology, religion and language in the Western world. In fact, many historians consider the Roman Empire to be the "ideal empire" because it was powerful, fair, long-lived, large, well-defended, and economically advanced. The calculation showed that from its foundation to the fall, a whopping 2214 years passed. It follows from this that the Roman Empire is the greatest empire of the ancient world.

Share on social networks