[Laner]

I thought this was really interesting.

It really puts some perspective on certain times in history. The Romans really did have the biggest empire the world has ever known, and the Mongolians blazed into the scene and fell back almost as quickly.

[Suits]

Fascinating.

[tylerdurden1993]

what about the british empire?

[Laner]

China is interesting. It has just rode along, neither taking too much, or being taken for too much (although it looks like the Mongols nearly wiped them out). And when Japan decides it cant ignore the world anymore they take a good chunk out of China.

But talk about balance and persistence.

[Ziltoid]

Wow, awesome graphic, have been looking for something like this for a while now.

Thanks dude!

[Samseau]

I remember seeing this as a child. Awesome find.

Few things:

1. The map appears to give "relative" power. So, during the Roman times, North and South America hadn't been discovered, making Rome the controller of 70% of the world's habitable land.

2. It uses land mass control to measure power, but America owns the world today despite not having the biggest boarders. Nukes alone would guarantee American hegemony if they so wished it. Viewing land as the way to measure control is not without it's limitations and is not necessarily the best way to measure power.

3. The map is slightly out of date. The USSR is still listed as a world power.

[Therapsid]

(08-13-2013 06:35 PM)tylerdurden1993 Wrote:  

what about the british empire?

It's in there in pink from say the 18th century. They split off the commonwealths as they became politically autonomous. Actually, aside from removing the Soviet Union, the British part of the chart would be drastically cut in a revision of this chart.

It's not a scientific graphic by any means, but it gives a rough appraisal of Western history. Despite the inclusion of China, it's definitely Western oriented, which is fine by me considering how history ended up. For example, one implication is that China during the five dynasties period in the 10th century wanes in importance on the chart. This makes sense since the country was divided among competing kingdoms. But then, Germany in green is treated as one entity even when it was in practice as divided as China was between major dynasties. One big exception for the East is in the 13th and 14th centuries, when the Mongol Empire is so extraordinarily enormous that it overwhelms the chart.

I notice it includes the pre-Columbian civilizations in the Americas but barely. Most pre-Columbian states weren't too big, but the Incas in landmass were in the 15th and very early 16th centuries one of the largest empires in the world.

[LeBeau]

You guys would probably like various video versions too, the border changes are dope:

[bacon]

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(08-13-2013 09:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

2. It uses land mass control to measure power, but America owns the world today despite not having the biggest boarders. Nukes alone would guarantee American hegemony if they so wished it. Viewing land as the way to measure control is not without it's limitations and is not necessarily the best way to measure power.

I guess this sort of argument, while correct, also serves as a powerful argument against mutual nuclear disarmament. If we followed this view - and I think it's fairly realistic - USA could be crumbling, with enormous debt and fragmented population - yet still be the world ruler due to its nuclear arsenal. In that context, it only makes sense for all other countries to have their nuclear arsenals too.

[BortimusPrime]

Funny how much adding World War II would change the bottom of that graph.

[germanico]

(08-13-2013 09:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

So, during the Roman times, North and South America hadn't been discovered, making Rome the controller of 70% of the world's habitable land.

Yeah, because at the time the whole continent was just sitting there, empty.

[Marlfox]

The 22 countries in the world not invaded by Great Britain.

No idea if its true cos I got it from The Chive lol.

[Jaylow]

(08-13-2013 09:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

2. It uses land mass control to measure power, but America owns the world today despite not having the biggest boarders. Nukes alone would guarantee American hegemony if they so wished it. Viewing land as the way to measure control is not without it's limitations and is not necessarily the best way to measure power.

America doesn't own anything including its own country. The US congress gets lobbied with billions of dollars from foreign interests and they in turn vote for what those investors want. USA had a "nice" run from WWII to 9/11.

[Samseau]

(08-14-2013 04:00 PM)germanico Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 09:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

So, during the Roman times, North and South America hadn't been discovered, making Rome the controller of 70% of the world's habitable land.

Yeah, because at the time the whole continent was just sitting there, empty.

No one has any idea who controlled the continent because they left no written historical record.

Thus, they are not on the map.

[Nolecbo]

This is a really cool timeline, thank you. After listening to Dan Carlin on the Mongols I thought they would be much, much bigger.

[bojangles]

It's crazily true. Even China (opium) and Russia (Crimea) got invaded.

[Spike]

(08-13-2013 09:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

2. It uses land mass control to measure power, but America owns the world today despite not having the biggest boarders. Nukes alone would guarantee American hegemony if they so wished it. Viewing land as the way to measure control is not without it's limitations and is not necessarily the best way to measure power.

I have to disagree on that. Nuclear weapons gives you an advantage over countries without nuclear weapons. Even though countries like China and India have considerable less nuclear weapons they would win the last man standing fight based on population.

Let's take China for example. In the scenario of an all out war, where China would launch all 250 missiles, it would mean that all major to small American cities would be in ashes with most of his population killed while China even though suffering greater retaliation would still have half or a third of the population left thus being the last man standing and being more able to survive.

In this case a third country (Russia?) would move on both countries and take the victory and world power.

It reminds me of a joke a Kazakhstan man once told me:

Kazakhstan is a huge country but has a very small population. If China would wage war on Kazakhstan then they wouldn't even need weapons.
Everyone in China just has to throw one shoe.

[Sonsowey]

(08-13-2013 09:38 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

1. The map appears to give "relative" power. So, during the Roman times, North and South America hadn't been discovered, making Rome the controller of 70% of the world's habitable land.

An accurate one would have had the Aztecs and Inkas listed...

Who even knows what Empires existed in the Americas 1,000 BC

[germanico]

(08-14-2013 04:48 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

No one has any idea who controlled the continent because they left no written historical record.

Thus, they are not on the map.

[Therapsid]

Archaeologists have some idea about the relative extent of pre-Columbian civilizations. But your point is valid - archaeologists have to figure it out, not historians. Whereas for ancient Rome and China archaeologists can work alongside scholars who study original texts.

The Incas were the largest. Most of the Inca's predecessors in the Andes were centered in northern Peru. The Aztecs empire was a confederation led by a triple alliance of three cities. The Mayans were mostly divided into city-states, etc.

As far as writing goes, yup, really only Mayan script rises to the level of a true written language in the Americas. The Incas had to rely upon knotted string called quipus to make records.

[Laner]

If any of you have not listened to Dan Carlins Hardcore History, I recommend you do.

I just finished his Mongolian series. Absolutely incredible what they did in such a short time. Highly recommended.

[coolkid]

Its based on a post-WW1 reality. So ~100 years off. But other than that, amazing map. As a history geek I flipped seeing it.

[Tex Pro]

(08-13-2013 11:20 PM)LeBeau Wrote:  

You guys would probably like various video versions too, the border changes are dope:

These videos are cool to watch, especially the first one. I wonder if a similar thing will happen to the American Empire (aka USA)...

Civil war II anyone????

[muc]

(08-14-2013 04:58 PM)Nolecbo Wrote:  

This is a really cool timeline, thank you. After listening to Dan Carlin on the Mongols I thought they would be much, much bigger.

Ah another Dan Carlin listener.
I sometimes get the feeling that I have a lot in common with the average RVF-Member. Another example.