Empires

[aerocontrols]

Just a question:

Of all the empires throughtout history, which was the worst, which was the most benign?

[Mike B.]

Assyrian Empire the worst...

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Best?

Incan?
:confused:

[hgc]

You just wanted to have the first post in a new forum.:D

[hgc]

The best are the Aztecs. They didn't subject their prisoners to years of imprisonment. They just ate 'em up.

[BroodingSkill]

Roman Empire, both

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Just a question:

Of all the empires throughtout history, which was the worst, which was the most benign?

How exactly do you define 'best' and 'worst'? Do you mean in the way they treated people, or the 'success' (area controlled/length of time in existance) of the empire?

And do you mean in absolute terms, or relative to other cultures in existance at the time? (Kind of like the discussion of the crusades in the politics forum... the crusades 'seemed' bad, but relative to other conflicts at the time, they weren't that terrible.)

[Nyarlathotep]

I think the Soviet Union wins the title of worst empire hands down. The body count, the economic devastation, the effects that it's policys have had on its environment. I don't think any other empire even comes close.

Most benign is harder. I can't think of a good candidate and I don't even know that I could say that ther is such a thing as a benign empire. The Roman Empire MIGHT be considered almost benign. It had it's faults but it gave a lot of benefits to its conquered people, and wasn't TOO harsh on them. I know it was a lot better than a lot that came before or since.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Just a question:

Of all the empires throughtout history, which was the worst, which was the most benign?

Benign? You mean as in did the least amount of harm? Was the nicest to the peoples it conquered?

If you mean most influential from a historical perspective, then there can be no question that the Roman Empire has had the most profound effects and influences on the world, so many of which are still with us today.

AS

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


Benign? You mean as in did the least amount of harm? Was the nicest to the peoples it conquered?


The Egyptians were undoubtedly the nicest to the peoples they conquered. They didn't even occupy - after forcing the surrender of this or that king or population, they just went home and waited for tribute.

[aerocontrols]

What I mean by 'benign' is....

I just wanted the first post on the new forum

How about this for a method of determining which empire was the most benign...

Picture yourself 'under' that empire, as a citizen of one of it's conquered territories. How badly do you want 'out'?

MattJ

[Dogwood]

I guess it depends entirely on your point of view. The brits might think that the British Empire was among the most benign, Indians may disagree.

[Checkmite]

Technically, I suppose the Aztec empire would be the most benign. Yes, I know about their - shall we say, eccentric - religious practices; but put everything into perspective. The Aztec empire was around for less than 100 years and confined to Mexico, and thus simply didn't have enough time to kill as many people as all the other empires.

[Dancing David]

Uh, hmm, how about the Empire of King Ashoka who converted to buddhism after he founded his empire,
the worst empire

empire furniture and design yuck!

[Robman75]

I'd like to know what "no occupation" by the Egyptians precisely means. During their expansionist periods the pharaohs occupied territory to the same extent as other established Near Eastern powers, with small garrison forces controlling strong points and important trade routes. Certainly it seems they were no more strict or cruel in such occupations than other conquerors, but their behavior was not exceptional.

[Ove]

I think the Soviet Union wins the title of worst empire hands down. The body count, the economic devastation, the effects that it's policys have had on its environment. I don't think any other empire even comes close.

I do, i think China excells when it comes to lives lost. The number of people that died during "The long March" and "The cultural revolution" is horrifying and the brainwashing was probably worse than in USSR (allthough it is a question about very bad vs. sheer hell ;) ).

[Giz]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Just a question:

Of all the empires throughtout history, which was the worst, which was the most benign?

I take it you mean in the light of our twenty-first century sensibilities? If so then the later empires may well seem "nicer", such as the British compared to the Mongols (though you'll still get exceptions, the Belgians made a petty good attempt at turning the clock back in the congo).

If you mean relative to the state of the rest of the world at the same time then I guess Rome would have a pretty strong claim on the benign imperialist title. Obviously Nazi Germany's behaviour in it's occupied terriories (and plans for the post war world) look even more heinious - if that's possible - when taking place in the middle of the "enlightened" twentieth century.

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Just a question:

Of all the empires throughtout history, which was the worst, which was the most benign?

The worst: the Assyrians. That is why Noah ran away when god told him to go Niveah (?).

The most benign: there really is no such thing as a benign empire since all of them are forced sooner or later to use extreme measures to maintain the said empire. However, about the closest thing I can think of would be the empire that Alexander the Great carved out. For the few years it was in existence, he allowed people to maintain their government and customs provided that they knew who was really in charge.

[tim]

Originally posted by mark tidwell
I guess it depends entirely on your point of view. The brits might think that the British Empire was among the most benign, Indians may disagree.

Of course we were. I know, because my teacher taught me so in the 1950s!
Whilst I wouldn't claim we were the MOST benign, we were probably better than many. As a rule we didn't go in for general massacres and so on. Far from perfect, yes. Totally evil, not IMHO.

[aggle_rithm]

The early Islamic empire was pretty benign. Before they conquered a city, they would give the people a choice between peaceful coexistence and annihilation. If they chose to co-exist, the local churches/synagogues would double as mosques, but the locals still had freedom of religion.

If they chose annihilation...well, you know.