the greatest conquest

[Ace of Gold]

Just curious i know this does not have anything to do with civ 4 but i was looking at the scenarios and a question came to mind. What country had the greatest conquest. I want to hear your opinions and sorry there is not many choices i just put the major ones down.
For me i would say Napoleon because he had such great tactics and strategy.

 

[Dark Sheer]

Just curious i know this does not have anything to do with civ 4 but i was looking at the scenarios and a question came to mind. What country had the greatest conquest. I want to hear your opinions and sorry there is not many choices i just put the major ones down.
For me i would say Napoleon because he had such great tactics and strategy.

If you ask me I would have say the Mongols. I think they carved the largest empire ever in known history. They have great strategist and fierce warrior/generals not to mention the most ferocious horseman and horsearcher known in history. And being a nomadic tribe / nation they adept and learn fast from their enemies. (learned the usage of cannon from the Jing and later numerous other first in siege weapons.

If you mean the largest and most stable empire then I would say the Tang Dynasty in China where their territory come all the way to almost present day turkey. And on another note, Tang Dynasty is an extremely good example of how religion help in empire building as the then nation around China (including stretching all the way to almost present turkey are all buddist nations.

 

[Quotey]

Napoleon, Hitler and Julius... conquested?

 

[AmazonQueen]

Taking into account the time period the Mongols.
In terms of the conquered territories becoming part of a long-lasting empire Caesar.
The 1 you missed who deserves to be up IMO there was Cyrus. He led a minor tribe of the Median Empire to conquer the Medes, Babylonians, Phonecians, Lydians and the Greeks in Asia Minor. For approx 2 centuries the Persian Empire was the superpower of its day.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Try history forum.

 

[Philo_Beddoe]

genghis, funny too, because in civ unmodded his sort of a weak leader.

 

[DigitalBoy]

I would suppose either Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan.

 

[Philo_Beddoe]

I would suppose either Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan.

yeah either of those two could be it, i dont count a single roman leader as, rome wasnt built in a day

genghis and alexander both counquered huge territories in their lifetimes

cant really say hitler or napoleaon as they both conquered and then lost their empires

alex and genghis died with their empires at their largest and intact

 

[markiz2001]

cortes-he and a few hundread adventurers took on an empire and won.
lenin-trotsky-a few hundread bolsheviks conquered the biggest country in the world
castro-he, and a few dozen men invaded cuba, and after a few years overthrew the government.

napoleon was not a conquerer. he never fought an aggressive war. all his wars were defensive.

hitler conquered poland, big deal, and france, got lucky. failed to conquer england because he started bombing london instead of the RAF, and totally screwed up operation barbarossa. if it were not for hitler, germany might have won the war, so hitler is not a good conqueror at all.

alexander the great might be #1. He took his army, and invaded a country 100x bigger then his own, and conquered it. within 7 years he increased the size of his empire 100 or 1000 fold.

genghis khan- okay, he created the biggest empire in history, but most of the land he conquered was empty wilderness.

it all depends on the criteria you use. most land conquered, hardest fought victory, greatest against-all-odds win, an empire that actually lasted, etc..

 

[Philo_Beddoe]

cortes-he and a few hundread adventurers took on an empire and won.
lenin-trotsky-a few hundread bolsheviks conquered the biggest country in the world
castro-he, and a few dozen men invaded cuba, and after a few years overthrew the government.

napoleon was not a conquerer. he never fought an aggressive war. all his wars were defensive.

hitler conquered poland, big deal, and france, got lucky. failed to conquer england because he started bombing london instead of the RAF, and totally screwed up operation barbarossa. if it were not for hitler, germany might have won the war, so hitler is not a good conqueror at all.

alexander the great might be #1. He took his army, and invaded a country 100x bigger then his own, and conquered it. within 7 years he increased the size of his empire 100 or 1000 fold.

genghis khan- okay, he created the biggest empire in history, but most of the land he conquered was empty wilderness.

it all depends on the criteria you use. most land conquered, hardest fought victory, greatest against-all-odds win, an empire that actually lasted, etc..

lenin & castro, no, not really

your right about the mongols though, the areas they conquered were for the most part pretty sparesly populated

I think Alexander is the best choice, Macedonia is tiney compared to the area he conquered, he did it earlier then anyone else to, and the territory he conquered was quite advanced for its time (egypt, greece, persia), unlike cortez who basically conquered a relatively technologically inferior people, also Alexander actually fought side by side with his troops and was wounded in battle numerous times. Genghis wasnt really all that physically courageous when compared to Alexander.

Carved out an empire before age 35, Alexander really was impressive.

 

[Verge]

Since the debilitating conquests of the Memymenmentos virus isn't an option, I couldn't vote in the poll

 

[Rotty]

To the people calling the Mongol Empire "sparsely populated", uh... by 1279 they had conquered nearly all of geophysical Eurasia (i.e. not the Indian or Arabian plate) east of Hungary and south of the Baltic, with the exceptions being Southeast Asia and the near-miss of their Japanese invasion fleet being taken out by the weather.

It wasn't just the steppe. Not even close.

 

[JaDo]

British Empire - 36.6 million km²[1] (under King George V in 1922)
Mongol Empire - 33.2 million km²[1] (under Khublai Khan in 1268)

 

[Philo_Beddoe]

To the people calling the Mongol Empire "sparsely populated", uh... by 1279 they had conquered nearly all of geophysical Eurasia (i.e. not the Indian or Arabian plate) east of Hungary and south of the Baltic, with the exceptions being Southeast Asia and the near-miss of their Japanese invasion fleet being taken out by the weather.

It wasn't just the steppe. Not even close.

yeah i forgot about china and russia

 

[Philo_Beddoe]

British Empire - 36.6 million km²[1] (under King George V in 1922)
Mongol Empire - 33.2 million km²[1] (under Khublai Khan in 1268)

33.2 was more impressive in an age without battleships and destroyers

 

[Leodavinci]

and the near-miss of their Japanese invasion fleet being taken out by the weather.

It is pretty interesting how many times in history more superior (in numbers) fleet was destroyed due to weather (Greeks vs Persians, Spanish vs English, Mongols vs Japanese, and I am sure those are not only examples)

 

[AmazonQueen]

I'm not that impressed by Alexander the Great as an empire-builder rather than a military leader. His empire split in many parts almost immediately after his death and had much less lasting influence than the Persian or Roman empires.

 

[Ace of Gold]

cortes-he and a few hundread adventurers took on an empire and won.
lenin-trotsky-a few hundread bolsheviks conquered the biggest country in the world
castro-he, and a few dozen men invaded cuba, and after a few years overthrew the government.

napoleon was not a conquerer. he never fought an aggressive war. all his wars were defensive.

hitler conquered poland, big deal, and france, got lucky. failed to conquer england because he started bombing london instead of the RAF, and totally screwed up operation barbarossa. if it were not for hitler, germany might have won the war, so hitler is not a good conqueror at all.

alexander the great might be #1. He took his army, and invaded a country 100x bigger then his own, and conquered it. within 7 years he increased the size of his empire 100 or 1000 fold.

genghis khan- okay, he created the biggest empire in history, but most of the land he conquered was empty wilderness.

it all depends on the criteria you use. most land conquered, hardest fought victory, greatest against-all-odds win, an empire that actually lasted, etc..

actually napolean was not definding he was conquiring europe. i would call that aggresive

 

[petepetepetep]

Caesar was the only conqueror on that list that really helped to build an empire, whereas the others made extensive but very temporary gains and the Mongols were just a wave of murderous horsemen. I'm not gonna count it as conquering if all you do is kill pretty much everybody. (I am ready for a Mongol expert to yell at me.)

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

I think this would be better in the history forum first off.

Secondly I thought the options didn't match the question. Personally I think the arabs/muslims starting under the rashidun were the greatest conquerors namely Khalid ibn al-walid or the sword of god.

I won't say the mongols because their conquests fell apart or rather disappeared underneath the powerful local cultures plus their sheer brutality almost changes the meaning of conquest. If you are willing to wipe clean the land of people and civilization then yes conquering is easy compared to say not killing them and learning to rule the local populations.