Who is the single greatest conquer of all time?

>Alexander conquers Middle East
>wow he conquered a bunch of people

>Mongols conquer Middle East, China, E-Europe
>IT WAS A BUNCHA DESERT DINDU NUFFIN

> Alexander
> expands greek civilization and paves the way for Rome
> Genghis
> unwashed, tribal and barbaric as fuck

>gets cucked by Romans
>It was our plan all along
kek

>tfw there was nobody even close to the title of "conquer" after the ghengis khan

What about the way civilization changed that made it so much harder for a single man/state to take over huge chunks of land?

Mongols were the first true empire that connected the east, middle east, south asia, central asia, and the west.

Before mongols, China was doing its own thing with very little contact with the west. Tang/Han before had bits of tiny interactions with central asia/middle east. But not to the extent mongols brought. Europe had no idea anything existed past Middle East.

Mongols brought in stories of the rich Chinese empires and the technologies Chinese held like the gunpowder and the giant ships, etc.

>Mongols were the first true empire that connected the east, middle east, south asia, central asia, and the west.

Where's the east? Where's central asia? Oh you have a small portion of spain. I guess Europe counts.

>Where's the east?
Sindh part of India.
>Central Asia
Did you not notice Transoxiana?
> a small portion of spain
Nearly the entire Iberian coast.

>Mongols were the first true empire that connected the east, middle east, south asia, central asia, and the west.
>China was doing its own thing with very little contact with the west.
Henlo John Greene.

China was in regular contact with the Byzantine Empire.

And before it fell, the Two Caliphates' Pax Islamica made travel between Byzantine lands to China peaceful.

It was only when the Abbasid Decline and the upheaval of the Turkics in Central Asia did the Silk Route started shitting up.

There was a distinction made in the original post that separated the Middle East, the East, the South East, and the Central Asia.

They're all technically "the east", but for clarity purposes there was a distinction made. Now I'm not sure why you're being dishonest about this when you quoted it directly.

Chinese contact with Byzantine was limited to handful a year at best. Caliphates had barely any contact with China. Turkics didn't have full control nor could they establish full control effectively.

Mongols effectively had control over the region for roughly few hundred years.From there, trade, stories, knowledge, money was all passed through via a safe passage mongols had created.

>Chinese contact with Byzantine was limited to handful a year at best.
>Le embassies = only form of contact.

Embassy contacts weren't yearly. It was every decade or so with new Emperors. That might be too generous as well since there's large instances of gap due to disruptions that occur often on both sides of the world and in the middle.

HEY THAT'S NOT TRUE
>posts picture of architecture the mongols found and decided not to destroy

Napoleon because unlike the others he really didn't possess any tremendous advantage technologically and whatever advantages he had tactically or numerically were due to his own inherent skills and organizational ability.

>retards from the steepe had a technological advantage over Muslim, Chinese, and European empires

Do people really believe this?

They did in ME/Europe for sure. They had advantage in siege tech from a Persian in China

>advantage in siege tech

*blocks your path*

>Alex
>conquers actual civilization
>successor states last for centuries

>nigger khan
>conquers wastelands
>successor states either get CHINK'D or collapse

Depends on the nature of the question. Are we talking about things like who wound up establishing the largest empire within one generation? Because that would be Genghis Khan. Or are we talking about conquering the most territory personally? Because that is Alexander's claim to fame (Genghis, unlike Al, actually took the time to sit down and rule his conquests while delegating expansion to others).

Hilarious that you posted that. The castle was built after the mongols destroyed the original. And that wasn't the original form either. Centuries of its existence led to gradual upgrades.

And the upgraded castles proved sufficient to BTFO the horse niggers when they came back

What if I told you mongols had lost cohesion by that point and E.European were fighting a weakened Mongol faction that split into 4 different factions. What if I told you the Mongol that E.Europe fought was not the strongest but the third strongest after the Yuan and the Ilkhanate.

I doubt your opinion on the matter would change since you seemed to be fueled by passion.

You cannot actually look me in the eye and say that Genghis "conquered" more than Alexander
Sure, he had more land areas nominally under his control, but the absolute entirety of Alexander's conquest was the whole of civilization at the time. Anyone who was anyone at the time, they probably fought with Alexander at some point, and Alexander beat them all. Sure, Genghis fought the Khwarazmian Shah and the Abbasids, but the Macedonians fought:
>all of Greece except the Spartans
>all of the Persian empire, which stretched from Ionia to Afghanistan and included Mesopotamia and Egypt (basically the two biggest and oldest areas of civilization in the world)
>Scythians (much like the Mongols)
>even eventually fought and subdued fucking Indians
Genghis' empire wasn't completely a wasteland, but I don't think an empire has ever contained the whole of civilization so near to completion as Alexander's did

Yes, exactly. You buffoons just don't get it, do you? Even the supposedly barren heartland was vital, even before Mongols let it prosper further until Samarkand became the new Baghdad.

Was timur the best mongol? Or was it subati?

The way the Mongols used cavalry was very innovative and utterly transformed Asia until gunpowder.

The Mongols were nomads but were extremely adaptable and meritocratic. When they massacred a city they would somtimes explicitly spare the artisans and bring them somewhere else to work and the Mongol warriors would stay their bloodlust and obey this order, apparently valuing them more than noble hostages and sexy women.

Gunpowder was around during mongols.

Kinda want to respond but I dont want to drag this on, so I'll make it short.

>all of Greece
Tiny. Barely able to muster ~40K soldiers total.

>Persia
He invaded right when their king died of being poisoned and the new Darius was suspected and local regional commanders didn't trust him.

>Scythians
Not mongols, not in numbers, technology, leadership, organization, resources, diversity, nor intelligence.

>India
Porus was a minor king on the edge of India. And that stopped Alexander the Great.

True. Mongol Empire was impressive but modern day Mongolia is fucking garbage.

This man.

I like Alexander as much as the next guy, it cannot be denied the dude was a brilliant tactician and a good strategist, although diplomacy and pr was where he really shined. He managed to subjugate the middle east and dived a bit into India, but all of those lands combined didn't have nearly as many men and square km as China, let alone all the other lands the Mongols conquered.

People dismiss him as a savage little horsenigger even though his influence on the world was equal if not higher than that of Alexander because he raped and pillaged. Tell you what, back then, everybody raped and pillaged, it didn't matter if it was a roman legion, a mongol horde, a warband of vikings or an army of devout christian crusaders, they all raped and killed innocents, they all looted villages, sacked cities and burned them to the ground. Every nation at war did those things, the mongols just did them more because they were constantly at war. Call them savages all you like but their military organization was the best the world ever saw and they had siege machines that the muslims and christians never even heard of at the time.

>And that stopped Alexander the Great.
Porus didn't stop him you idiot, they would have continued and likely made it to China at least if his men weren't homesick

No he is not mr losangeleszahed.

>unwashed, tribal and barbaric as fuck
ironically many greek viewed alexander like his, a barbarian greek wanna-be.

this

Easily overshadowed by guys like Genghis Khan/Subutai + Alexander + Caesar + Napoleon

But yea, maybe he's in 5th place, but that's still not a good spot if you want the spotlight.

Rank 1 usually takes the most space, Rank 2 takes 1/2 as much as Rank 1, then Rank 3 which is 1/2 as much as Rank 2, and so on.

Also you could make the argument about Qin emperor Qin Shi Huang for uniting China.

He fought against the fiercest people on the planet at the time. The people he fought against were constantly at war against each others for 200+ years with battles taking place almost yearly.

The Qin dynasty that united China controlled around ~20M people. And had fought battles that exceeded anything from the wars any other people have fought in history and will fight for the next 500 years(three kingdoms).

Julius Caesar , Since most "Conquerors" failed to build up an efficient administration service in the lands they conquered thus in the case of Alexander him not actually ruling over parts of his nation while still alive and also the shit that occured later and in Charlemagnes case the Saxons revolting immediatly after he'd leave + His empire not sticking about ,thats why a big army was crucial in those times

The mongol empire was around for a while after ghengis, not to mention he started with basically no empire.

>Easily overshadowed by guys like Genghis Khan/Subutai + Alexander + Caesar + Napoleon
He's arguably as good as Alexander

>homesick
>As for the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their courage and stayed their further advance into India. For having had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered with multitudes of men-at-arms and horsemen and elephants. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites and Praesii were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand fighting elephants.
The numbers are a slight exaggeration but remember that Alexander had an army twice the size of Porus too.
>and likely made it to China at least if his men weren't homesick
The rest of India/SEA was covered in thick forest unlike the Punjab which is vastly open.
It would have gotten ugly for them fast.

It was decentralized as fuck even during his lifetime
>muh empire

How was it decentralized "even during his lifetime"?

Are you using decentralized to mean he was not in control of his empire or are you using it to mean "he commanded his generals to conquer lands meanwhile he sat in his throne"?

In either case, the power lay in the hands of Genghis Khan. His generals had undying loyalty towards him. His greatest general Subutai served him till his death at the age of 71. Long after Genghis Khan has died. He was helping out his sons and grandsons. There were no indication of decentralized power structure during his time.

His power meant nothing in places like Anatolia , >Undying loyalty
Unless the lands "he" conquered had no local ruler then i guess you're right to say it wasn't "decentralized" since his generals loved him ,
but going of common sense and how local rulers act when their overlord is 500 km's away (seeing as the Mongol Empire was segmented) i have to say his rule accounted for shit

Genghis didn't control Anatolia. This is his empire at his death, not really that impressive.

Western xia were disloyal. He destroyed them or rather his sons destroyed them. Like literally wiped them from history. Nothing survived from the old Western xia.

So you base your historical narrative on "common sense"? What is this garbage. Mongol segmentation didn't happen until after the death of Mongke.

He destroyed disloyal bastards whose territory literally stands on the border of mongolia today? XD my dude i didn't expect that one desu, i don't think you know how hard it is to exert power over areas that are thousands of miles away from the center of power

He exerted power over Persians thousands of miles away from home. Bringing rougly 150k. His empire also nearly destroyed E.Europe thousands of miles away. As well as song dynasty which is nearly 2000 miles away.

Are you retarded by any chance?

Why bring up Persia or China when Mongoloids literally perpetuated massacres up there in those countries all the time till the Ilkhanate came around?
>someone states correctly that large swathes of the Mongol Empire is largely unpopulated land
>someone else rebuts "no we had most of India, Persia, and China"
>ignores the fact the Mongols kept massacring people in Central and Western Asia for decades before settling down
I hate Mongolfags.

>Tell you what, back then, everybody raped and pillaged, it didn't matter if it was a roman legion, a mongol horde, a warband of vikings or an army of devout christian crusaders, they all raped and killed innocents, they all looted villages, sacked cities and burned them to the ground.

pretty much, up until the napoleonic wars at least then things gradually changed.

One wonders what the world would be like today if the Mongol Empire never existed.

I bet Mongolia would still be a shithole.

None of these things did Genghis do. Furthermore, the Mongol Empire was far, far from destroying Eastern Europe.

...

Im just arguing that the mongol state that existed was far far away from being an >empire
I'd say that the "Empire" that "destroyed" E Europe was the Golden Horde

until gunpowder dominated, rather

Don't forget that Mongolia was a Soviet Republic for 70 years.

Being a Soviet Republic for a very long time, tends towards shitholeness.

It was a shithole even before that.

What is the nu-male fascination with Mongolia? Is it because they're non-white?

The same people who jerk themselves raw whine about colonialism and Hitler, what's up with that?

>anyone of note has to be white
No user, you're the nigger

Thats just wrong, Mongolia was independent but it was subordinate to the USSR. In addition, the country was far better off during communism then during the 90's and 2000's.

Hülegü and Möngke decided conquering Europe would be more important than booting the muzzies out of North Africa.

>Soviets kill ~10-15% of mongols
>Mongols are far better off during communism

Hulegu of Ilkhanate didn't invade Europe. That was Berke of Golden Horde.

Hulegu was out invading the Middle East/Muslims. Berke, who converted to Islam, got mad and attacked Hulegu opening up a second front on the Hulegu's campaign.

They eradicated the clan system, destroyed ancient artifacts, forced people into poorly run ranches that caused the loss of invaluable animal husbandry techniques and practices, and killed many extant Borjigin princes.

How can anyone not admire the largest,without the use of boats, empire to ever exist?

To be quite perfectly honest the Mongols had it coming, as a people

IMPORTANT (atleast to me lol)

This whole Mongol Empire and Genghis Khan stuff really bothers me... There's this whole hypocritical mindset among Eastern-Asian people about Mongol Empire and empires in general.

East-Asians (especially Chinese and Chinese descendants) like to praise their great Mongol Empire and how great and powerful it was.

BUT at the very same time they cry how British, Spanish and Portuguese empires cucked them hard.

Genghis Khan and Mongol Empire tortured, slaved, genocided and oppressed West-Asian and Eastern-European tribes. There's nothing cool in torturing, slaving and genociding people... Nothing.

Asian people are always quick to cry about British Empire but they really like to forget that it was them who first decided to come to Europe and Middle-East and kill innocent Native-European and Middle-Eastern tribes.

SO if you want to praise and brag about Mongol Empire (or any other empire) and Genghis Khan (or any other warlord) DON'T cry about other empires doing the same thing to you.

t: Finnish person

They had a large navy, used mainly against the Song, the Koreans and the Japanese.

That's because the mongols looked like them. The British, or any other European, were white men, therefor evil.

Yeah... because Mongols really look like your typical Middle-Eastern or Eastern-European person.

>East-Asians (especially Chinese and Chinese descendants) like to praise their great Mongol Empire and how great and powerful it was.

Lmao, not the Mongol Empire: the Yuan Dynasty bit. Kubilai Khan did put an end to almost a century worth of Jin-Song-Mongol wars and ergo as the possessor of the Mandate of Heaven, is recognized as emperor.

In addition he was the only good Yuan Emperor/Khan to the Chinese. Furthermore, the Mongols got heavily Sinicized.

>Spain
>Portugal
>Cucking China.
LOLWHAT? Spics remained in the Philippines and Portugal was driven off by the Chinese from East Asia and told not to come back until they stopped being piratical niggers and the Ming Emperor gave them the island of Macau as a reward. Let's not get ahead of ourselves, Paco Joao.

Just remember, if you want to praise and brag about Mongol Empire (OR ANY OTHER EMPIRE) and Genghis Khan (OR ANY OTHER WARLORD) don't cry about other empires doing the same thing to you. It's stupid and hypocritical.

Also I didn't mean to offend anyone. I presume you are either Chinese or Chinese descendant judging by how upset you got (notorious Chinese glassheart).

Just don't be a hypocrite.

>implying any nation has ever cucked the USofA

Damn freedom is nice.

Was just explaining it to you, nignog. In Chinese imagery, Genghiz Khan is the fur-hatted barbarian Steppenig while Khubilai is the more refined counterpart. That's because the Mongol Empire and the Yuan Dynasty are seen as two different things over there.

Furthermore its always the recent hurts that people dislike. People tend to get over shit that's past 200 or so years.

Well, except if you're a Balkanshit, those assholes open up wounds dating back to the medieval ages or something.

Yuan Dynasty is seen as Chinese because it fits their historical narrative they want to present to the world. One which supports their ambitions of a growing empire..

>Yuan Dynasty is seen as Chinese because it fits their historical narrative they want to present to the world. One which supports their ambitions of a growing empire..

Or it could be just as simple as Kubilai Khan declaring possession of the Mandate of Heaven following the conquest of the Southern Song, which led to the unification China under his rule, ergo justifying his rule over the Chinese as their Emperor, in addition to being the nominal Great Khan over his Mongol/Turkshit subjects.

Imperial Dynasties are formally declared, m8. It wasn't the case of Chinese centuries after writing that the Mongs formed a dynasty. Kubilai Khan even selected the name " DaYuan (Great Yuan)" taken from a classical book he once read. Even following the very Chinky practice of posthumously declaring his ancestor, Genghiz Khan, as "Taizu" (great ancestor), so hes listed as an Emperor, a filial act.

That's because if you didn't you were killed. They were incredibly authoritarian and there's stories of mongols being executed for having an extra bowstring from the armory.

>mongolosers actually believe this

Genghis Khan was the best conqueror of all time based on starting conditions. He built his early rule over decades and multiple failures. Alexander was literally handed a successful military kingdom (his father Phillip II just won the Greek-Macedonian wars and set up the League of Corinth).

Is this a meme? The only Chinese student that I ever saw talking about the Mongols called them savages.

>The Ganges is 600 feet deep
I find it funny that mideval and ancient historians would believe this to be true since all they had to go off of was documents and not empirical evidence.

Han Chinese call anyone not Han as barbarians. The Han nationalism is both fostered and nurtured by the CCP as it aids their national interest.

>he doesn't know about the silver trade destroying the Ming economy

Not all conquers controlled a military

Nice argument faggot. Subutai buttfucked the largest standing army in Europe with 25,000 men. That was literally just a scouting expedition by the way. If Ogedei hadn't died HRE would have fallen to Subutai's armies.

this desu

>and Spain's.

The entire point of Spain's existence in the Philippines was to have a spot on the India-China spice route. Not to mess with China. Only person who planned on doing so was Governor Dasmarinas, a wannabe Conquistador with unrealistic dreams of a Mainland Asian Spanish empire which included the invasion of China. That cunt couldn't even win against the Cambodians who were undergoing a complete and utter decline under Ayutthaya and the Vietnamese Empire, and got himself killed in a revolt by his Filipino-Chinese subjects.

In fact most of the time, China and Spain cooperated in destroying pirates in the region.

B8