The Most Unique or Irreplaceable Empire in History

[Rex Romanum]

Out of the following five historical empires, which one do you think is the most unique, or hardest to replicate/emulate?

A primary parameter that can be used to determine the "unique-ness" of an empire is to imagine alternate worlds where it's nipped in the bud, and asking, how hard it will be for its rivals or neighbours to build an empire on the similar scale. The harder it's to replicate, the more unique or irreplaceable an empire was.

1) Macedonian Empire
If Macedon didn't exist, how plausible it's for other Greek states like Epirus or Thessaly, or Greek league of city-states like Delian League or Peloponnesian League, to conquer the Achaemenid Persian Empire?

2) Roman Empire
If Rome didn't expand, how hard it's for its enemies like Carthage, the Etruscans, or the Celts, to form empire spanning the whole Mediterranean?

3) Muslim Caliphate
If the Arabs didn't invade out of Arabia, how believable it's for other peripheral civilizations like the Berbers in North Africa, or the Aksumites in Ethiopia, to conquer Sassanid Persian Empire and half of Byzantine Empire, all the way to Spain?

4) Mongol Empire
If the Mongols never expanded, how plausible it's for other nomads in Central Asia like the Tatars, Uyghurs, or Kipchaks to form empire spanning most of Eurasia?

5) Ottoman Empire
If the Ottomans never formed their empire, how possible it's for other Turkish beyliks like the Karamanids, Eretnids, or Karasids, to form empire spanning Middle East, South-Western Europe, and North Africa?

Some notable empires are not included as candidates because they have been emulated many times and thus losing their "unique-ness". For example, empires based on Western-Central Europe (Carolingian Empire, Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany). Same case with China (Tang, Ming, Qing) and India (Mauryan, Gupta, Mughal).

European colonial empires are also not included due to the fact that it's not hard to imagine alternate worlds where they fill each other's shoes. E.g. France colonizing India and Australia, or British conquest of the Aztecs and Incas.

Another useful parameter is to imagine a Multiverse, and how many universes out there where similar empire arises within same scale and time period. The less alternate universes with similar empires, the more unique an empire was.

 

[Sardar]

Rome, with the Mongols and Caliphate a close second and third.

 

[AltoRegnant]

The sheer power of the religion built into the caliphate gives it the win imo

 

[Silver01]

While a Berber empire I believe can i.n theory conquer Spain and all Mediterranean north Africa pushing to Aksum and Persia Is imo not happening assuming the center of power is in one of the succesors of the Mauro roman kingdom

 

[Byz]

Interesting question.

It's a hard call between the Romans and Arabs. Both completely altered and shaped entire civilizational groups of people. Both basically came out of nowhere. The others were of course impressive, but just not quite to the same extent.

I really think you could pick either with a good argument. Ultimately the Arabs are my pick just due to the massive and improbable sea change they brought, and the survival and impact of Islam. But Rome was just as important, and if elements didn't survive it's because it evolved and we see the secondhand cultural impacts everywhere.

The Ottomans don't really belong on this list IMO. They were an impressive empire, but don't have the same level of impact as the other four, and were hardly the only Empire to emerge from that area historically. The Ottomans were very cool and important, but they weren't the same level of shapers of world history.

 

[cmakk1012]

I give the edge to the Romans thanks to their having influenced so many historically significant empires that came after them, including the Arabs who are my second choice and the various European colonial empires. The Caliphates undoubtedly massively reshaped Eurasia, but their influence didn’t indirectly reach as many parts of the world (eg, the New World) as Roman law and culture eventually, distantly did.

 

[RedKing]

I’d say Rome since if you get rid of Rome, most of the other Empires would never have existed.

 

[JackLumber]

The mongol empire while unique in its sheer size and it did have significant impact it's just not quite in the same league as some of the other options in terms of long lasting cultural influence.
The Macedonian empire while impressive really doesn't hold a candle to any of the others interms of influence, it simply doesn't have the longevity.
Now the Roman empire is my pick, its influence has permeated countless cultures and it's longevity is second to none.
The caliphate is my runner up, extremely influencial and world shaping.
As for the Ottomans, not to sound crass or anything but is this some kind of a joke? It sits firmly in the shadow of the caliphate, Rome and a third source that really should of been on this list the Persians, in many ways it was a kind of synthesis of these three.
Really odd that you chose to include the Ottomans and not one of the Chinese imperial dynasties like the Han as well.

 

[Metempsychosis]

I voted for the Caliphate, but I'd have picked Achaemenid Persia.

 

[Mars aeternum]

The Roman Empire, undoubtedly.. Where to begin?

Hundreds of millions speak Romance languages which evolved from Latin. Many more use the Latin alphabet to write their own language.

Latin literature, and through Rome, Greek too, has left an everlasting impact on human literature.

Christianity spreaded throughout Europe and as a result, all over the world, because of Rome.

Modern law in many cases is based on principles used and developed during the Roman Empire.

The calendar and time-keeping..

And probably many more..

 

[Gloss]

I'd say the Arabs, mostly because there are really no other candidates around that could repeat what they did in a similar way, maybe if you try hard you can end up with an Armenian or Georgian empire but it doesn't seem likely.

 

[Hohensaufen]

People seem to be missing the "unique" part of the question and there I don't see the Roman Empire as being so difficult to emulate; e.g. it wouldn't be hard to imagine the Etruscans or Carthiginians creating a similar Mediterranean Sea-based empire, after all this was the point of the Punic wars.

I chose the Mongol Empire because I find it difficult to imagine that another steppe people would be able to follow just the right course that Genghis Khan followed and create the single largest contiguous land-empire ever (I find it hard to believe that it happened in OTL but happen it did). My second reason being that the Mongols changed the face of civilisation so profoundly, today's society would be irrecognisable without the diffusion of knowledge the Mongols facilitated but also with the diseases that followed them; e.g. no Mongols probably means no/very different black plague, means different end of middle ages/renaissance.

 

[Metempsychosis]

I chose the Mongol Empire because I find it difficult to imagine that another steppe people would be able to follow just the right course that Genghis Khan followed and create the single largest contiguous land-empire ever (I find it hard to believe that it happened in OTL but happen it did). My second reason being that the Mongols changed the face of civilisation so profoundly, today's society would be irrecognisable without the diffusion of knowledge the Mongols facilitated but also with the diseases that followed them; e.g. no Mongols probably means no/very different black plague, means different end of middle ages/renaissance.

Eh, horselords creating vast empires are a dime a dozen, such that it happened before Genghis and after him. Founding a religion and essentially overwriting the world of antiquity, now that's different.

 

[Hohensaufen]

Eh, horselords creating vast empires are a dime a dozen, such that it happened before Genghis and after him. Founding a religion and essentially overwriting the world of antiquity, now that's different.

One that spawns numerous successful successors isn't, though. The Mongol Empire stands out even among its peers.

I assume you're referring to the Arab Empire in your latter sentence and I concede that that Empire is certainly a serious contender for most unique and irreplaceable. I still hold the global ramifications of the mongols to be more significant but I suppose ultimately there is no "right" answer anyway.

 

[JackLumber]

People seem to be missing the "unique" part of the question and there I don't see the Roman Empire as being so difficult to emulate; e.g. it wouldn't be hard to imagine the Etruscans or Carthiginians creating a similar Mediterranean Sea-based empire, after all this was the point of the Punic wars.

I chose the Mongol Empire because I find it difficult to imagine that another steppe people would be able to follow just the right course that Genghis Khan followed and create the single largest contiguous land-empire ever (I find it hard to believe that it happened in OTL but happen it did). My second reason being that the Mongols changed the face of civilisation so profoundly, today's society would be irrecognisable without the diffusion of knowledge the Mongols facilitated but also with the diseases that followed them; e.g. no Mongols probably means no/very different black plague, means different end of middle ages/renaissance.

Rome has nearly 2000 years of unbroken continuity. It is the longest lived empire to ever exist.
Being a record holder at something makes you unique by default.

 

[cmakk1012]

I'd say the Arabs, mostly because there are really no other candidates around that could repeat what they did in a similar way, maybe if you try hard you can end up with an Armenian or Georgian empire but it doesn't seem likely.

The thing is that while the Caliphate was uniquely successful, I’ve often seen it argued on here that some kind of Arab expansion in that era was pretty much inevitable thanks to population pressure. That potentially makes it less “unique” than Rome because the odds of the Samnites or the Veiians or whoever taking Rome’s place even in unifying the Italian peninsula seems highly unlikely.

 

[Gloss]

The thing is that while the Caliphate was uniquely successful, I’ve often seen it argued on here that some kind of Arab expansion in that era was pretty much inevitable thanks to population pressure. That potentially makes it less “unique” than Rome because the odds of the Samnites or the Veiians or whoever taking Rome’s place even in unifying the Italian peninsula seems highly unlikely.

I disagree with those claims, the over-population argument is essentially an unproven assertion that people ended up popularizing, like many other vacuous claims.
It certainly was not overpopulation that lead them all the way to Sindh and Iberia.

 

[Thoresby]

Macedonian. On one level you had repeatedly seen less developed, fringe, highland peoples conquer the Fertile Crescent, that's how the Persians had started out after all but it was still a remarkable achievement.

Roman. The Mediterranean has never been united before or since which says something about what an astonishing achievement it was.

Caliphate. Less unique than the Roman Empire because the Caliphate was fundamentally a product of the ERE and it's rapid expansion was entirely due to the Romans smoothing the path.

Mongol Empire is the least unique, the only thing that was different was it's sheer size. It was simply the last in a succession of massive steppe (compared to contemporary settled) states. So not very unique.

Ottoman was at least in territorial, though not cultural or religious terms, the successor to the Eastern Roman Empire, the territory controlled by both at their respective heights was eerily similar. So not very unique.

 

[Grokborg]

People seem to be missing the "unique" part of the question and there I don't see the Roman Empire as being so difficult to emulate; e.g. it wouldn't be hard to imagine the Etruscans or Carthiginians creating a similar Mediterranean Sea-based empire, after all this was the point of the Punic wars.

I chose the Mongol Empire because I find it difficult to imagine that another steppe people would be able to follow just the right course that Genghis Khan followed and create the single largest contiguous land-empire ever (I find it hard to believe that it happened in OTL but happen it did). My second reason being that the Mongols changed the face of civilisation so profoundly, today's society would be irrecognisable without the diffusion of knowledge the Mongols facilitated but also with the diseases that followed them; e.g. no Mongols probably means no/very different black plague, means different end of middle ages/renaissance.

Interesting points. The Mongol Empire was an unprecedented and world changing conquest, but one aspect is that most of the countries they conquered were other nomadic khanates that then provided the reinforcements to continue it for them. The Jurchen Jin had pre-conquered Northern China and put Song on the retreat; the Cuman Khanate and Khwarezmians provided the foothold to the west. When those khanates collapsed the Mongols continued that system that had gone on for a long time.

It kind of resembles how Rome took over the already Hellenistic parts of the eastern Mediterranean, "pre-conquered" from Persia for them (if centuries before), which nonetheless did take a lot of intrigue and machinations by both the Romans there and the Mongols in similar but different migratory lands.

The First Turkic Khaganate was almost as East-West stretching as the Mongol Empire. Not as North-South stretching and didn't conquer Persia or Tibet, but this was before Turkic polities existed there and against a more hostile if less populated landscape. The settlement of territories was as significant as the Mongols, creating a new center in Central Asia, who the Abbasids would recruit as mercenaries-- and who rebelled against or outmaneuvered the Abbasids, leading to the Seljuks and other Turkic ruled Islamic kingdoms, which were as far west as Egypt.

Some of the Mongol effects and reputations were also created or bolstered later by successors like Timur and the Golden Horde, just like for Turkic, or Hellenistic, or Roman imperial remnants.

First Turkic Khaganate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Umbric Man]

I will say I think the Macedonian and Caliphate Empires are a bit less unique than they seem at first glance, since essentially they take up much of what was considered the traditional lands of pre-Islamic Persian Empires: the Iranian Plateau, the Middle East to the Oxus and Indus, and Mesopotamia, give or take change. Even the Caliphate began to almost immediately hemmorage Spain and northwestern Africa till it resembled something vaguely Achaemenid and Sassanid-esque.