The Geek Empire at its hight was a monarchy not democracy, same thing with Rome.

I like the British Empire, Rome under the 5 good emperors and Mongolia.

I feel I may be a bit biased in this since I am Asian. But I'd have to say the brief stint of the Chinese Empire struck me as the most impressive. Getting millions of people to follow one person (even for a short period)and having a huge empire that promoted trade, commerce and business with several countries, at the time, is no easy feat.

The geek empire will rise again! Stronger than before! :D

When did China promote trade outside of its borders?

You did bring up a good point, I would like to add Persia to my list.

At one point 44% of the worlds population was under Persia's control, which is higher then any other empire in history

China had trade ships that sailed to Africa I believe in the 500 AD mark or thereabouts. They brought back animals from there, and the emperor looked at a giraffe and said there was no reason to trade with them, they had nothing they needed, based off that.

I'm partial to the obscure Ghurid Empire circa 1200 AD right before the Mongols swept through Asia. Two brothers kicked ass throughout Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran and tried to get into India. This may have been the height of Afghanistan and it is quite a shame that all these historical assets have been since destroyed or are inaccessible to ousiders.

The Chinese ships were later than 500 AD. In fact the greatest period of Chinese naval exploration was under the Mongol dynasty (13th to 15th centuries). The Chinese treasure fleet was so huge that it was able to force Gujerat (itself a maritime empire) to accept (theoretical) Chinese suzerainty. Chinese expansion could have interfered with that of Portugal and the Netherlands had the Mongol dynasty not been succeeded by the Ming dynasty, which recalled the fleets and began a couple of centuries of isolationism.

MONGOLS

@ Fasces: Yes, though the Greek empire was a monarchy at its height, I would still include the earlier achievements as part of empire building. I.e., many other achievements also came in -- or were due to -- the earlier period as well.

imperialism, ugh! :/

Lol, a lot of approval for the Mongols.
I am horrified with the idea that the Mongols can win this approval-contest. What did the Mongol Empire ever left to Humankind?
My historical knowledge might have forsaken me... I just remember slaughters, sorrow, rapes, plunderings, sieges.
Fortunately this federation of barbarians did not last longer than a couple of generations.

The mongols were great, but not as great as Alexander the Great and his father phillip II created in my opinion a better empire

What makes the Greek empire better is not only their contribution to sciences. politics, etc but the fact that they went up against a stronger and richer enemy, and though heavily outnumbered they were able to defeat the Persians in several real battles by applying outstanding strategy.

@Decima - it all depends upon what you describe as "best". You seem to define "best" as producing some cultural monument and adding to the history of human progress. Others seem to describe it as who held the largest empire, which empire had the greatest influence on world events, etc. So really, without defining what is "best" this is all rather pointless since its based upon different ideas of what constitutes a good empire.

So the Mongols may well be good since they ruled a very large empire, were virtually undefeated in combat, and ran an extremely efficient trade empire. Halt's example of the Chinese Empire is very different, since it was one of the only non-expansionist empires in history (depending upon which dynasty he was talking about).

My choice would be the Spanish Empire. They conquered other empires in the New World just a few decades after reclaiming all of Spain. Not only were they the #1 power in the New World, but the #1 power in the Old World as well. No other nation could claim that fact in the history of European Imperialism. Even at its height, Britain could not take on France single-handed in Europe, nor could it take on Germany single-handed when Germany rose to power.

@Decima, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Mongolica this might be a good place to start while trying to understand the Mongols' popularity.

I like the Persian Empire, as well. I've always been fond of Cyrus the Great. It's a shame Cyrus the Younger failed in his attempt at the throne. It'd be interesting to see how history would have changed had he won.

PS: Yay discussions! It seems like the Mongols and the Greeks are the most popular so far...

@Decima: Thats what the movies like to play out, but in reality the Mongols were one of the most secular and trade oriented nations of the era.

Yes they did a lot of pillaging and killing to become a massive nation, but life under Mongol rule was actually better then the governments prior to that and in some cases the governments that succeeded the Mongolians.

So long as you submitted and surrendered to the Mongols you were fine. If you tried any resistance however you would be killed, your wives raped and children enslaved.

But most historical reports showed that under the mongols trade went up and crime went down, which are two rather positive traits for a civilization.

It was under the Kublia Khan (Genghis Khans grandson) that trade between China and Europe resumed for the first time in around 1500 years.

Unfortunately the Mongol influence in the world was less significant then we normally credit them because of fighting between Mongol generals.

Macedon and Mongolia are quite similar in terms of their sudden rise and sudden fall, however Mongolia conquered more and was able to remain large for longer. They were also more secular and pro-trade, for that reason I consider Mongolia and not Macedon as one of the greatest empires in history.

@G-Man: Greece is mostly famous for its philosophers, but the philosophers we love were executed for what they thought because of how controversial it was, Socrates was hardly a product of Greek culture and freedoms given how his life ended, even if the following generation of Greeks loved him.

That said Alexander was a monarch who was groomed from birth to be a conqueror. He was a product of the Macedonian monarchy and both Rome and Greece showed us that at the time, monarchy was far superior to democracy.

@Lakersfan: It was as Alcuin put it, the trade happened under the Yuan Dynasty. However most historians consider Yuan to be Mongol not Chinese given that the dynasty was founded by Kublia Khan and was entirely Mongolian in heritage, they just happened to have a capital inside modern China's borders and most of their empire covered modern day China.

The Ming Dynasty carried on this trade for a bit, but the isolationist policies from Ming rulers in the 15th century put this trade at an end. The Ming were a powerful empire, but its power was entirely owed to the trade, development and stability brought by the Mongols that ruled right before it.

A case can be made for the silk road under the Han Dynasty, but for the most part the silk road was between India and Europe given the isolationist culture China had since Confucius.

In anycase, if Halt wants to claim that the Chinese Empire is the greatest empire in history, he really needs to clarify which dynasty he is talking about.

I am not a fan of Ming or Qing and have mixed feeling towards Han. I personally don't know enough about Tang or the dynasties preceding Huang to comment on them.

@ Fasces: Yes, but the Greek civilization still gave rise to these philosophers and ways of thinking, as well as making outstanding achievements in science, mathematics, the arts, medicine...

And I think the Roman Empire must also be considered among the great empires if only for the Pax Romana, one of the longest periods of peace in that era, and for their own achievements in science, architecture, the arts...

And as for sheerly large empires, in the 20th century, the Japanese Empire's sphere of influence actually extended over the greatest area size-wise, since much of it was ocean.

G-Man, God bless you. I feared that this discussion could end without naming the Romans.

Time span (753 b.C to 476 a.D) and Influence in history.
The Roman Empire has no rivals.

Art & Architecture (the Arch was widely used by the Romans, domes, monumental statues)
Civil Engineering (monuments, water supply systems, thermal baths, theathres still functioning nowadays…)
Trade & a never seen before roads system (never seen until the Renaissance era too).
The longest peaceful era regarding the most number of people (Pax Romana, which archetype of any other later “Pax”)
Religious tolerance.
Synthesis of cultures, not assimilation. No genocides. Every submitted population could maintain its culture, accepting the Roman law.
Diplomatic system. A surprisingly small % of the population was used effectively in the military because of efficient diplomatic relationship with the provinces of the Empire and the off-border populations.
Military strategy & military engineering. The army was formed by professional soldiers, as same as the US Marines 2000 years later.
One thousand years of Roman law system, which has been reintroduced after the Middle Ages as the basis of the most law systems of the Western world.

Oh, I forgot to mention, respectfully speaking for any Mongol-supporter, we’re currently on a virtual Forum, not in a virtual Yurta.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_%28Roman%29
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yurta

I'm gonna try to do this kindly, since I know of others who would viciously tear apart the example of the Romans.

First off, the timing is wrong. The Roman Empire didn't start in 753 BC. If I am correct, it is more around 300 BC that they came to any significant power. Secondly, Roman art borrowed heavily from Greek art that preceded it. They were hardly a religiously tolerant government (persecution of the Jews and Christians?) and they treated those who stood against them very similarly to how the Mongols did. When they sacked Carthage, did they not kill all the men, enslave the women, and sow the fields with salt?

But, they deserve mention for their longevity, their architectural and engineering prowess, diplomatic efforts, military, and their attempts to incorporate other people into the Roman system.

@Decima: I mentioned the Romans in my first post...

@Goldfinger: According to Roman mythology the Roman Empire was around since 753 BCE. However in Roman Mythology after a 100 or so years the Romans were annexed by the Etruscans.

For this reason I, along with you, shouldn't consider the start of the Romans until 509 BCE when Rome rebelled from the Etruscans and become a rich and prosperous city state.

That said the Roman Republics dream of empire didn't start until 340 BCE during the Latin Wars which caused the Republic to start expanding.

The Romans were rather tolerant, like persecution only really happened under Nero. After that it was kinda frowned upon.

that said, the sack of Carthage was probably the most destructive and brutal pillage in history.

@G-Man: but all cultures had similar epiphanies. There was a golden age of philosophy in China at the same time...

This was the first time in history where not everyone was farmers (Ancient Egypt all the commoners were farmers and then builders/merchants in the dry season).

In terms of philosophy, China at the same time easily trumps Greece, but us being westernized think that all good things come from Europe.

Very few people have studied the history of China or India, despite both China and India having empires that could easily match 'Rome' in terms of population, military and technological prowess during the same time period.

I give points to Rome for longevity and western influence.

On the topic of longevity, Ancient Egypt lasted for 2800 years and has at least 1500 years on any other civilization in history. So give them points for that.

As for most influential civilization of all time, I would probably go with the Romans.

From language, architecture, legal system, philosophy and culture, all of western civilization comes from Rome. The Roman Republic was really the basis for the United Kingdom parliamentary monarchy which was the basis from the American Republic.

Despite popular belief the Roman Republic might have predated Athenian democracy. While the Roman Republic was founded in 509 BCE, the earliest confirmed date for the Athenian democracy is 460 BCE (according to Herodotus) . While estimated claim that it could have started as early as 550 BCE, it is very possible that the Republic came first.

Also the 5 good emperors was probably the best example of benevolent dictatorship in history.

Now the question is, does most influential=greatest or is there some other variable that people want to use?

The next option to consider is Modern Western Civilization:

We are more free, more rich, more advanced, better educated, better informed, have better weapons, better technology and more peaceful and tolerant then any other civilization in history.

That has to count for something right?

Finally since it hasn't been given lip service yet, the British Empire:
For any given time, the British had more influence over the world under Queen Victoria, then any other nation had in history.

While only 23% of the world was directly under British control, the influence the British had outside her borders was far greater then the influence any other empire has carried in history.

Britain at her height was far more successful at carrying out war then the USA is today and was able to maintain her spot as the worlds only super power for 102 years (1763-1865) which is a feat that no other empire has accomplished (USA has only been the worlds only super power for 20 years and China is catching up fast.)

Britain was a rather tolerant empire and was one of the first to abolish slavery and serfdom, has the longest lasting democracy in history, lead the world in technological progress with the industrial revolution.

So for greatest empire of all time I might have to lock in my answer with the British. But its really a tough call between Rome, Mongolia and Britain.

Don't worry people, with 4 posts in a row I am done now. I'm not ready to make this a conversation between me, myself and I, lol.

@fasces - I get what you mean. I'm taking my first Chinese history class and they're really not emphasized enough in western primary education. China was at the very least at Europe's level until the Industrial Revolution. India under the Mughals was a great and prosperous civilization too.

Other variables to consider is the frequency of revolts, literacy of population (China will win in that case), amount of public goods it provided, strength of rule of law of the central government, etc. But a lot of that stuff we simply don't have data on.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Ottomans. They were extremely tolerant of religion, and have a surprisingly long history. Its just that the only Ottomans we are introduced to in school are the weak Ottomans of the 19th century.

And speaking of them, the Byzantines have a fairly good claim at the title too. While the civilized world burned around them, they somehow persevered for nearly a millenia.

No one has also mentioned the Akkadian Empire. The first empire ever, it paved the way for future empires.

Wasn't Egypt already around during the time of Akkadia?

First of all, Im really liking this discussion. But Im a bit disappointed that no one has brought up the Islamic Empire or the Ottoman Empire.

Under the Abbasid and Umayyad dynasties, the Islamic Empire experience massive cultural and economic growth. It became the hub of the already existing Eurasian trade and after conquering the Persians and taking land from the Byzantines, they completely ruled the Middle East, and extended into Africa. And as Muslim scholars got hold of Chinese technologies like the compass and dhow, naval trade boomed! Muslim merchants owned the Indian Ocean trade and mosques can be found all over South Eastern Asia now. As well, well Europe had its head in its ass during the Middle Ages, the Islamic world was experiencing a golden age, with science, the arts, engineering, architecture, medicine and philosophy all centuries ahead of Europe. It was Muslim knowledge and preservation and innovation of Greek and Roman work that allowed for the Renaissance to happen. Religion, at least initially, was also fairly free, with conquered people being allowed to keep their traditional religions; only having a tax to pay. Even as the empire became more decadent, it was still the dominant force in the region basically until the 19th century and the arrival of the British and French