Which culture circle possessed the greatest military power?

Which culture circle possessed the greatest military power during the Middle Ages?

  • Total voters
    23
Sure, why not. Course, many of the people who posted in it haven't posted anything in a lot of months. So be it. I still maintain that the most powerful cultural circle of the Middle Ages would have to be the Far East. We can come to that conclusion quite rapidly. 1.) China waxed and waned, but had immense military and cultural strength. China alone can easily equal the cumulative cultural and military strength of all of Europe or all of the Middle East, especially if we total the entirety of the Middle Ages. 2.) the Far East produces the Mongols, and the much lauded armies of Christendom and Islam alike were crushed in short order by the Mongols. I can sum that up in with two names: Baghdad and Liegnitz. Their legacy continued from there. The Golden Hoarde maintained power for hundreds of years in Central Asia. Then there is Tamberlane and later the Mughul Empire in India, both of which actually came directly from the Mongols. 3.) The Seljuk Turks, the Ottoman Turks and the Turks in general actually originated from the broad region containing modern Kazakstan, Western China, Mongolia and Siberia. None of these are "Middle East" locations. Most notably, the Ottoman Turks maintained a powerful and long lasting empire that outshone all others in Europe for several centuries. It could be argued that their religion was Middle Eastern and this makes them Middle Eastern, but I don't agree. I don't feel that makes them Middle Eastern anymore than a Nestorian Christian in the Mongolian Empire of Ghenghis Khan is/was European. It was the Turks and not the Arabs that repelled the Crusades. And like it or not, every Crusade after the fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem was a failure. That Kingdom was shortlived anyways.

The most likely reason for anyone to just automatically respond Europe is likely because they've never studied the history of the rest of the world for that same time period. The trouble with the term "Middle Ages" is that it is a term based upon European reckoning, so most people are going to tend to think of Europe the moment they hear that phrase. So we'd be taking into consideration the time period from about 900 AD to 1400 AD. You've got some very big things going on during that period and the the really big things did not come from Europe.
 
Last edited:
It is not just about conquering the territory it is also about holding it. Now there four countries that stand out during this time. Portugal, Spain, France and England and their influence still can be felt across the world in their language and customs
 
weren't the dark ages the time when Europe was at its decline.

Because how come the Chinese had the crossbow 1500 years before the Europeans.
 
Each era has produced Nations who have got it together military. The Egyptians, Macedonians, Greeks, Romans, Vikings, and the British, they all have their different styles but they all achieved a great deal.
 
LeEnfield said:
Each era has produced Nations who have got it together military. The Egyptians, Macedonians, Greeks, Romans, Vikings, and the British, they all have their different styles but they all achieved a great deal.
Click to expand...

You forgot the Netherlands!
 
LeEnfield said:
Would you compare the size on the Dutch colonies to that of Rome, Greece or Britain
Click to expand...

Yes.

Roman and Greek empires were both land empires, which meant no need to navigate and coordinate halfway across the planet in a time with communication would take months.

Britain was, according to my Dutch friends, knocked around the block a few times by the Dutch.
 
During the times of King James things went to pot in England until he got the push and William and Mary took over. There was incident where Dutch had a good success against us and the King carried the can.
 
Yep certainly thats where the phrase "Dutch Courage" comes from the only Battle honour that British and Dutch Marines share Medway. However only a slight spanking by the Dutch ending with a big 'Slapping' by the English. General of the Navy Robert Blake your time is Nigh!!
 
The mongols never really tried to take over Europe, it was just another expansion. They went all out against china and the middle east and conquered those regions, but there was a conservative interest in europe as the generals there were given limited troops. Had the mongols gone on a large offensive against europe, then they would have a healthy chunk of that continent for sure.
 
It would probably started falling apart in less than a century like in China, but it would have had a major impact like it did in asia. Nationalism would have given rise and germany probably would have become a unified kingdom rather than the mess it was before. The papacy would be in danger since the pope would have probably been killed or something by the mongols and there would be no one to take his place for decades. Britain would be ok like Japan was, but would have used this situation to their advantage and grab chunks of Europe where they could.

France would probably emerge stronger as well since they worked together for once against a common enemy, but their realm would be smaller. Marco Polo would be visited by the mongols instead of the other way around, and perhaps constantinople would have fallen much sooner. Even if the mongols did lose much ground in a short amount of time they would probably have the forces there to secure some territory in East europe for a while and would have been a barrier to trade to the west. Who knows, that may have preciptated the western europeans to explore the world much earlier to get around the huge mongol empire.

Now imagine if the mongols went through the khyber pass and took india, well i guess the mughals already did that, but that would be a very huge empire.
 
I just rolled into this thread and I can't make up my mind. A lot that I read makes sense. The trouble I have is that the Middle Ages are from 500 ad to about 1500 ad. In this time you saw the decline of the Mongols, the rise and absolute power of the Ottomans/ Saracens and Moors in the Middle East and Northern Africa. They were unbeatable until their defeat at the gates of Budpest and Poitiers. And after that it certainly the Europeans who held the scepter of military might. So I can't say any specific cultural zone held the power the entire Middle Ages...
 
Ted said:
I just rolled into this thread and I can't make up my mind. A lot that I read makes sense. The trouble I have is that the Middle Ages are from 500 ad to about 1500 ad. In this time you saw the decline of the Mongols, the rise and absolute power of the Ottomans/ Saracens and Moors in the Middle East and Northern Africa. They were unbeatable until their defeat at the gates of Budpest and Poitiers. And after that it certainly the Europeans who held the scepter of military might. So I can't say any specific cultural zone held the power the entire Middle Ages...
Click to expand...

You meant the gates of Vienna...right?
 
G Connor said:
You meant the gates of Vienna...right?
Click to expand...

They were both besieged by the Turks, but both sieges were after 1500. So technically I was wrong, because 1500 is seen as the end of teh Middle Ages. But the point did come across.
 
If you trawl through history there are many civilisations that could hold this title. There were the Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Chinese , to name but a few, and all have left there mark on history.
 
I suppose power is very fleeting then since no one is all powerful for more than a century on average, the gods are fickle you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top