2
   

Rome the only sucsessfull empire in europe??

 
 
Spawn
 
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:00 pm
think about it is there eny other emire in europe that has lasted as long as Rome
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 1,996 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
Child of the Light
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 04:26 pm
I think The British Empire and The French Empire under Napoleon would qualify as successful.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 04:29 pm
No empire lasted longer in Europe than the Roman empire. (about seven centuries)
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 09:26 am
Depends on what you mean by "Roman" and how you define "empire." The Holy Roman Empire lasted a little over 1000 years (800-1806). If that was an "empire," then it outlasted the Roman empire, unless we include the Byzantine Empire as a continuation of the Roman empire (as Gibbon did). In that case, the Roman empire lasted from 27 B.C. (when Octavian was named "Augustus" by the Senate) to A.D. 1453 (when Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Turks). In that case, the Roman empire lasted over 1400 years. On the other hand, if you place the starting date of the Roman empire at 27 B.C. and its ending date at A.D. 476 (the collapse of the western Roman Empire), then it lasted a little over 500 years. Depending on how one measures these things, both the Chinese and Byzantine empires lasted longer than 500 years (if one counts the Byzantine empire as separate from the Roman Empire), and the Assyrian empire lasted about as long.

A good place to compare empires is at this site.
0 Replies
 
Ray
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jan, 2005 09:22 pm
The Napoleonic era had some effect on laws, and nationalism especially.
0 Replies
 
Kyle esq
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 07:50 pm
Didn't the British empire last the longest? They exist, even today! Yes, even today Smile
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2005 07:58 pm
No, Kyle. Sir Winston Churchill, I believe, was the first to admit that, after the emancipation of India, the British Empire no longer existed. That is why the British isles today are called the United Kingdom, not the British Empire.

It is problematic to include the Holy Roman Empire in any catalogue of 'empires.' It was not holy. It was not Roman, but German. Anf it was really a conglomerate of dukedoms and principalities, rather than an empire in the true sense.
0 Replies
 
Spawn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Jan, 2005 11:55 am
i mean controll over europ by a europion based empire Britan was a colony alll round the earth but not in europ the chines empire is probably the longest in the world but i am tolking about europ
0 Replies
 
Kyle esq
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Jan, 2005 10:04 pm
Merry Andrew wrote:
No, Kyle. Sir Winston Churchill, I believe, was the first to admit that, after the emancipation of India, the British Empire no longer existed. That is why the British isles today are called the United Kingdom, not the British Empire.

It is problematic to include the Holy Roman Empire in any catalogue of 'empires.' It was not holy. It was not Roman, but German. Anf it was really a conglomerate of dukedoms and principalities, rather than an empire in the true sense.


Never knew that. Interesting. But why did Winston Churchill declare that after the emancipation of India. It still, technically existed.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Jan, 2005 10:13 pm
Not really, Kyle. Neither Canada nor Australia nor New Zealand were considered 'dominions' any more; they had become fully autonomous independent states, recognizing the Queen only as a courtesy. The African colonies were on the verge of being granted independence (Rhodesia became Zimbabwe). The lease was running out on Hong Kong as a Crown colony and there was no intention of trying to renew it. Etc. etc. There is still something called the Commonwealth Countries, which include the aforemention (except for Hong Kong and Zimbabwe) as well as Bermuda and some other former colonies. But, really, the Falkland Islands aare about the only colony England has left. The Commonwealth is a far cry from the old Empire.
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Feb, 2005 10:06 pm
Perhaps teh European Union under great stretch of the mind will soon be considered the next effective "empire" of europe
0 Replies
 
Spawn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Feb, 2005 11:27 am
but it is doing what the romans did but not with force but with diplomatics
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Rome the only sucsessfull empire in europe??
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/20/2019 at 01:03:41