Early Islamic conquests under Muhammad, 622–632 AD (dark brown); Rashidun caliphate, 632–661 AD (light brown); Umayyad caliphate, 661–750 AD (yellow brown) – Wikipedia “Caliphate” public domain image

(7) ARAB – UMAYYAD CALIPHATE (661-750 / 756-1031)

The Arab conquests were a nigh-unstoppable historical explosion, once previously divided tribes in a historical backwater had been united under Mohammed – conquering one of history’s largest pre-modern empires (indeed the seventh or eighth largest in all history) in about a century or so, a blitzkrieg by horse, sail…and camel!

Mohammed had essentially conquered the Arabian peninsula, but his death left his successors – the three great Arab caliphates – only at the start of extending his empire to even wider conquests.

Now it might be said that I am somewhat inconsistent between empires in my entries, as I classify some, such as the Arab caliphates, as separate empires by different dynasties, while others I essentially classify as single empires despite their dynastic succession or fragmentation.

And the answer is, as usual, that I make my own rules and break them anyway – some empires have historical unity to them, if only in culture or theme, that appeals to me, while the different Arab caliphates appeal to me as distinct polities.

The Rashadun Caliphate, immediate successors to Mohammed, did most of the heavy lifting of empire as they broke out of the Arabian peninsula. Two formidable empires blocked their path, the Persian Empire and the eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire, but the Arabs conquered the former and routed the latter back to Anatolia.

However, it was under their successors, the Umayyad Caliphate, that Arab empire reached its greatest extent, westwards from the north African shore to Europe itself – conquering Spain (well, not quite all, in a manner similar to the famous caveat to the Roman conquest of Gaul in Asterix comics) and famously invading France before being turned back at Tours by Charles Martel. Eastwards, they also extended beyond Persia through central Asia to the fringes of India and China – the latter of which presented even the Tang Empire some difficulty resisting their advance.

The Umayyads were mostly overthrown by the third Arab caliphate, the Abbasid Caliphate, who then presided over what is often regarded as the Golden Age of Islam from their capital in Baghdad – but for all that became increasingly vestigial in the empire they had inherited from the Umayyads as it fragmented into separate dynasties. The Abbasids did revive their political authority somewhat in Mesopotamia and Persia – only to be crushed along with Baghdad by the Mongols, although they continued to limp along in even more vestigial form in Egypt until the Ottomans replaced them as caliphate. Ha! That’s what you get for messing with my boys, the Umayyads!

Nor were the Umayyads done with history just yet – the Umayyads managed to pull a Taiwan, with an Umayyad prince in the role of Chiang Kai-Shek, fleeing into exile across the Mediterranean to Spain and continuing the Caliphate as the Emirate of Cordoba independent from the Abbasids, even with their own rival golden age of Islam in the fabled Al Andalus of Spain.

The Umayyads endured for almost three centuries before finally falling again in 1031 – but true to karmic form, once again cursed their successors with fragmentation, as Islamic Spain broke up into minor states and principalities, weakening it to Christian reconquest.

The Umayyads actually used a plain white flag!

DECLINE AND FALL

You have to rank the Ummayads high for tenacity in their decline and fall – even in defeat by the Abbasid Revolution, they pulled a Taiwan to rule in Spain, partying it up in Ibiza like an English tourist .

THE UMAYYAD CALIPHATE NEVER FELL

Well it obviously did, although perhaps not in its enduring influence in Spain, and even more so in the dreams of caliphate by Islamic political extremists in the twenty-first century.

METEORIC RISE

The Arab caliphates and their conquests – the early Islamic conquests as they are sometimes called – were one of the most meteoric rises in history, ultimately conquering one of the world’s largest empires in a little over a century.

That conquest sees it ranked at least in seventh or eighth place for largest empires in history with about 11 million square kilometers, but I’ve seen a greater extent asserted for the height of the Umayyad Caliphate of 13-15 million square kilometers, which would potentially rank it as high as fourth place. Also, while 622-750 AD is generally given as the period of early Islamic conquests, those conquests were effectively done by 720 AD, with only minor fluctuation in the last thirty years.

Accordingly, the empire of the Arab caliphates was won in not just one but three meteoric rises. The first was by Muhammad himself, essentially uniting the area of the Arabian Peninsula or about three million square kilometers, albeit thinly populated desert, in the ten years or so from 622 AD to 632 AD. His successors, the Rashidun Caliphate, essentially doubled that by conquests from the East Roman Empire and Persian Empire in next twenty to thirty years from 632 AD.

And this entry, the Umayyad Caliphate more than doubled that again, essentially in the thirty years from 690 AD to 720 AD.

THE SUN NEVER SETS

One of the top 10 largest empires in history – although the sun literally set on them, they can be ranked among the world empires of history.

EVIL EMPIRE

To be honest, I don’t know much about the brutality of Arab conquests or repression, although there seem to be a number of revolts against them, not least the Abbasid revolution itself.

But they do have to rank highly in evil empire stakes for one thing – the Arab slave trade, which was of a scale at least equal to, if not exceeding, the more notorious Atlantic slave trade by European empires – not as intense perhaps, but of a longer duration. As in only abolished (when it was formally abolished) in the twentieth century.

Map of Ottoman Empire in 1683 by Chamboz for Wikipedia “Ottoman Empire” licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

(8) OTTOMAN EMPIRE (1299 – 1922)

The empire that conquered Constantinople and besieged Vienna – twice.

As the latter, the last non-European empire to invade and conquer significant parts of Europe (unless you count the Americans or Soviets), although Vienna was their high water mark – and as the former, the power that finally conquered (and saw itself as inheriting) the last of the Roman Empire.

Ironically, the Ottomans often resembled the Roman Empire it ultimately supplanted, firstly in its rise from one of numerous non-descript warring tribes on a peninsula, albeit the Anatolian rather than Italian peninsula (although as further irony, the Romans traced themselves from that peninsula as well, with their mythic origin from Troy). And secondly, in its tenacity in decline.

It is also intriguing how much of the origins of modern history might be traced to the looming presence of the Ottoman Empire in Europe and the Mediterranean – such as the discovery of the New World from seeking to find alternate trade routes to Asia and so on.

The rise of the Ottoman Empire rivals the conquests by the Arab caliphates it ultimately replaced in predominance in the Middle East – and indeed replayed much of the same history. The Ottoman Empire may have lacked the range and speed of the Arab conquests, although it made up for that in the extent to which it invaded and conquered within Europe.

With its conquest of the Byzantine Empire (as well as Constantinople as its newly conquered capital) and control of the Mediterranean basin, the Ottoman Empire was a transcontinental empire at the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa for six centuries.

Egypt was of course the jewel in the crown of their African empire – but it extended westwards from Libya to Morocco (and briefly into the Atlantic with the Canary Islands), becoming the bases of the fabled Barbary corsairs or pirates which even fought the United States, although these were only nominally under Ottoman control. The Ottomans also extended southwards to the Horn of Africa – and into naval wars in the Indian Ocean.

In Asia, they inherited the caliphate and its predominance in the Middle East, extending south through the Arabian peninsula, although held at bay by a resurgent Persia under their own Turkic Safavid dynasty.

And in Europe, they conquered the Balkans, extending to Crimea with the Crimean Khanate or Tatars, successors to the Mongol Golden Horde, as their vassal state, and also reached to the heart of Europe to besiege Vienna. Although apart from its defeats when besieging Vienna, it encountered significant holdouts or resistance elsewhere – Croatia, Dracula or Vlad the Impaler, Venice and the naval Battle of Lepanto.

It faced its waning tide of decline in the aftermath of its second defeat at Vienna, steadily losing its conquests in the Balkans even as it was propped up by Britain against Russia, resulting in it being styled as the “sick man of Europe” in the nineteenth century – somewhat overconfidently, as the Allies were to find out in WW1, although ultimately it collapsed in that war.

DECLINE & FALL

Ironically, the Ottomans might be compared favorably to the Romans they supplanted in their tenacity in decline. They did not endure for so many centuries as did the Romans – but then modern history moves a lot faster.

Of course, they were helped by European powers propping it up against each other, particularly Britain propping it up against Russia.

And against the apparent odds, they and their predominance in the Middle East endured until the First World War – and they might well have endured beyond that if they had remained aloof from that war and not chosen the losing side. Even in that war, they proved a resilient adversary, and even in defeat, they cast a long shadow – historian J.M. Roberts refers to most wars in the Middle East thereafter as the wars of Ottoman succession, up to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.

THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE NEVER FELL

On the other hand, their imperial core Turkey, to which they were shorn after the First World War, has also had a remarkable resurgence, rebounding almost immediately after its defeat from that war against further incursions, and newly emerging as a regional power in the Middle East, extending its influence and military presence through much of its former imperial territory

THE SUN NEVER SETS

Well, the sun did literally set on the Ottoman Empire in pure geographic terms – for example, it did not extend as far eastwards into Asia as its Arab caliphate predecessors. However, it can properly be ranked as a world empire in its influence, extending across three continents and reaching even further beyond that.

METEORIC RISE

No meteoric rise here.

In its first century, it steadily spread over the Anatolian peninsula of its origin as well as leaping across to the Balkans peninsula to spread there, but staying much the same on both peninsulas through its second century. It was its third century – the 1500s – that saw the Ottoman empire pick up the pace of expansion to meteoric, albeit more in Islamic Asia and Africa as it rose to caliphate as well as empire. However, as meteoric as that may have been, it obviously does not qualify as the rise of its empire.

EVIL EMPIRE

As I said, the Ottomans get a lot of historical hate from certain circles – but sadly, I do have to rank them highly in the evil empire stakes. To be honest, I don’t know quite how brutal they were in maintaining their conquests, but they were notorious for their patronage of piracy and slavery, particularly through the Barbary corsairs.

What earns them their high ranking in evil empire stakes is their actions against ethnic minorities in the empire’s dying days – notably the Armenians – that gave the definition to genocide in the twentieth century

The Qing dynasty at its greatest extent in 1760, with claimed territory not under its control in light green – based by Aldermanseven on Albert Herrmann’s map in the 1935 History and Commercial Atlas of China for Wikipedia “Qing Dynasty” under license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

(9) CHINA – QING EMPIRE (1644 – 1912)

The last Chinese empire, lasting into the twentieth century with perhaps the most spectacular decline and fall on the world stage in modern history.

Like India, China has seen the rise and fall of numerous empires over millennia that could well be the subject of their own top ten, although Chinese empires are probably better known to general history and more coherent imperial states than their Indian counterparts.

Similarly to India, there are a number of candidates for the top spot among Chinese empires – the Qin and Han empires were its definitive empires (giving their name to China itself and its predominant ethnicity respectively), while the Tang, Song and Ming empires all vie for status as classical Chinese empires or golden ages. The Ming empire is particularly reputed for being on the threshold of becoming a maritime empire with its fabled fleets and expeditions, before turning back to the usual landbound nature of Chinese empires.

The Yuan Empire – the dynasty of Kublai Khan and China’s Mongol conquerors – could also argue its claim for top spot, and depending on how you reckon it, may well qualify as China’s largest empire.

However, I award the top spot to the Qing Empire. Firstly, it is the Chinese empire of modern history, its last empire that survived until falling in the early twentieth century, as well as the empire that interacted most with European powers as they increasingly encroached upon it.

Secondly, my particular fascination with empires is with their decline and fall – and few things were as spectacular in modern history , or loom as large in the hindsight of a Chinese revolutionary regime succeeding it and adapting its imperial forms, as the decline and fall of the Qing Empire.

And by spectacular, I mean the grand spectacle playing out on the world stage of it desperately trying to fend off foreign powers it previously saw as barbarians or tributaries, but even more so fighting the endless rebellions within itself, until it was ultimately overwhelmed by the final one.

Of course, it didn’t start off that way – like every empire, it had its robust rise, essentially as a conquest of Ming China by one of those northern non-Chinese minorities that bubbled up occasionally to rule China, in this case the Manchus (for which Manchuria is named).

At its height in the 18th and early 19th centuries, it was the largest Chinese empire in history (depending on how you calculate the Mongol Yuan Empire) – and indeed fourth largest empire in history, as well as the most populous state and largest economy in the world.

And then came its decline and fall, in the so-called century of humiliation – usually reckoned to start with its defeat by Britain and France in the Opium Wars, which heralded ever more depredations by foreign powers, as well as ever more dangerous rebellions against the empire.

I’ve heard it said that the Qing Empire literally faced a peasant rebellion an average of every hour or so. I don’t know the truth of that assertion, which probably tallies up the hours in the numerous historical rebellions against the Qing, although I also suspect that many or most rebellions were too limited or localised to have any serious consequence.

Not so the Taiping Rebellion, in which a cult with a leader proclaiming himself the younger brother of Jesus and declaring his own Heavenly Kingdom, slogged it out with the Qing in the bloodiest civil war in history, with casualties to rival the First World War or even the Second World War.

Although it was in the Boxer Rebellion that China’s humiliation by foreign powers perhaps reached its nadir. That or its defeat by Japan in the Sino-Japanese War. It was one thing to lose to European powers – it was another to lose to another Asian state, a former Chinese tributary, that had been in a similar position to China vis-a-vis European powers only a generation or so previously

Qing China finally fell to rebellion or revolution in 1911, which abolished empires in China altogether (even if many of their features were to recur in their successors), with the last Qing emperor abdicating in 1912.

DECLINE & FALL

As the decline and fall of empires go, Qing China ranks up there with the most spectacular and tenacious of them, holding the line despite the odds – and when it did fall, at least it fell to internal revolution rather than conquest. Particularly as they did it on a shoestring – apparently they were never able to raise taxes above 2% of their economy.

“There are serious questions as to whether any government could’ve handled the gargantuan tasks the Qing faced, and they managed to survive a civil war that by all accounts should have destroyed them and would probably have taken down most lesser Chinese empires.”

Even then the Qing emperor at least managed to bounce back, although his empire did not – twice, albeit more by that adage of history repeating itself first as tragedy and then as farce. Firstly in 1917, when he was briefly crowned for a fortnight by a royalist warlord in the so-called Manchu Restoration, and secondly in 1932 as “emperor” of the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo

It’s tempting to think what might have happened if the Qing could have pulled off the same trick as the defeated Nationalists and retreated to Taiwan – but unfortunately for the Qing, they had lost Taiwan to Japan in the Sino-Japanese War

If nothing else, they totally had a better flag than any of their successors.

THE QING EMPIRE NEVER FELL

On the other hand, the Qing Empire never fell. As the Soviet Union ironically replicated much of the nature and territorial claims of imperial Russia – with Stalin as the red Tsar – so too did Communist China with imperial China, particularly under Mao as red Emperor.

METEORIC RISE

If I count the Maurya Empire as having a meteoric rise, the Qing Empire had a more meteoric one.

As the Maurya Empire effectively was founded by conquering and replacing the former Nanda Empire, so too the Qing Empire rose to power by conquering and replacing the former Ming dynasty, in what is often dubbed the Ming-Qing transition (or Manchu conquest of China). Technically, that took 65 years, from 1618 when the Qing revolted as their own state in Manchuria, to 1683 when the remaining Ming holdouts fell to the Qing – but really, the heavy lifting of the Qing conquest of China was done in 18 years from 1644 to 1662.

THE SUN NEVER SETS

Although the Qing Empire was confined in physical extent to east Asia, it deserves its status as a world empire – its designation for itself as the Middle Kingdom or heart of the world not too far from the reality as a world unto itself, the world’s most populous state and largest economy

EVIL EMPIRE

While the modern view of Qing China tends to be closer to that of victim to Western powers, it can rank reasonably high as evil empire. Its original conquest of Ming China is estimated to have a death toll of at least 25 million. And it was seemingly indifferent to even higher death tolls to suppress the rebellions against it – although a casual indifference to loss of human life, even in the millions, was not unusual in either its predecessors or successors in China.

India under Maurya rule c. 250 BCE (based on map p. 69 of Kulke, H.; Rothermund, D. (2004), A History of India, 4th, Routledge) by Avantiputra7 for “Maurya Empire” Wikipedia and licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

(10) INDIA – MAURYA EMPIRE (321 – 185 BC)

The Maurya or Mauryan Empire ranks in top spot among Indian empires, mostly due to my fandom of its emperor Ashoka, held in semi-legendary regard as one of India’s (and history’s) greatest emperors, as well as the first state to rule almost the entire Indian subcontinent (except the southernmost part that consistently held out against other Indian empires except their own and the British).

The Indian subcontinent has seen the rise and fall of numerous empires that could well be the subject of their own top ten, even if most are little known outside Indian history – reflecting that they almost never extended beyond the subcontinent, at least in direct territorial extent. In fairness, the Indian subcontinent has always been virtually a world of its own, particularly as a proportion of world population and economy (the latter at least until the ascent of Europe).

There are a number of candidates for top spot among Indian empires. There’s the Gupta Empire, from the fourth to later sixth century (and therefore contemporary to the declining west Roman empire), often considered the golden age empire of classical Hindu India.

There’s the early modern Islamic Mughal (or Mogul or Moghul) Empire, which might well be considered the height of empire in pre-British India as well as that best known in general history, not least because it gave India its most iconic landmark, the Taj Mahal.

And of course there was the crown jewel of the British Empire that was the British Raj – although that is usually not ranked among Indian empires as such.

However, there can only be one empire for this entry and that is the Maurya empire, which one might consider the Roman Empire of India, or at least the equivalent of the rising imperial Roman republic with which it was a contemporary.

And its founder for which it was named, Chandragupta Maurya, ranks almost as highly in legendary esteem as Ashoka – or Rome’s Romulus for that matter – rising from humble origins from a cowherd and essentially to bandit leader to defeat the Nanda Empire (which had faced off none other than Alexander the Great) and forge his own empire instead.

Back to Ashoka, he extended the empire to its greatest extent before, as it is told, being sickened by the violence of the Kalinga War (against the Kalinga state on the Bay of Bengal), he converted to Buddhism and pacifism, thereafter ruling with legendary benevolence.

Although his empire extended only throughout the subcontinent, its influence extended well beyond that through his patronage of Buddhism and Buddhist missionaries, which arguably played the same role expanding that religion as Roman imperial state patronage did for Christianity.

One of Ashoka’s edicts proclaimed the territories “conquered by the Dhamma”, from the Buddhist term Dharma and reflecting the moral law or sphere of influence within Buddhism, to extend to the west through the Hellenistic kingdoms to Greece itself

The empire declined and fell within fifty years of his death, which shows you where pacifism gets you as an empire. In fairness, that was due as much to the subsequent line of succession, although it hasn’t stopped some historians alleging that Ashoka’s pacifism undermined the “military backbone” of the empire – while others assert that the extent or impact of his pacifism was “greatly exaggerated”.

Art of the Samath Lion Capital statue for Ashoka – the closest thing to a flag I could find for the Maurya Empire

DECLINE & FALL

Nothing to see here – it all fell apart quickly after Ashoka. That’s where pacifism gets you – I guess it’s a Darwinian world after all

THE MAURYA EMPIRE NEVER FELL

On the other hand, the Maurya Empire never fell – arguably having the most enduring influence of any Indian empire through its patronage of Buddhism.

METEORIC RISE

I rank the Maurya Empire as having a meteoric rise, but it’s hard to be sure as there are no contemporary records of the conquests and reach of empire by its founder, Chandragupta. On balance though, he seems to have conquered most of its full extent, in large part by conquering the former Nanda Empire, during his reign of 23 years or so from 320 BC to 297 BC. However, it reached its definitive greatest extent during the reign of his more famous grandson, Ashoka, from 268 BC to 232 BC, so it might well have been said to have risen over three generations (or about 88 years or so).

THE SUN NEVER SETS

The sun obviously set on the Maurya Empire, which was limited in physical extent, as almost all Indian Empires were, to the Indian subcontinent. However, I think it might properly be reckoned as a world empire, particularly in its “territory conquered by the Dhamma” or influence through Buddhism – a world religion on which the sun does not set.

EVIL EMPIRE

One of the few empires, at least under Ashoka’s legendary benevolence, that avoids the tag of evil empire, albeit arguably at the cost of its endurance.

In The Outline of History, H.G. Wells wrote “Amidst the tens of thousands of names of monarchs that crowd the columns of history, their majesties and graciousnesses and serenities and royal highnesses and the like, the name of Ashoka shines, and shines, almost alone, a star.”

“The Rhodes Colossus”, a cartoon by Edward Linley Sambourne published in Punch magazine in 1892

Given my interest in military history, it’s not surprising that I’ve also always found empires a fascinating subject of history, again from the fortunate perspective of being well removed from the sharp end of them. Empires are typically creatures of military conquest or power, and rise and fall by war.

Indeed, the two books that define my historical (and political) worldview are Sun Tzu’s The Art of War and Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (yes – I know I’ve shortened the title for the latter) – so it’s not surprising that their subject matter, war and empires, also define my primary interests in history.

Not all empires are equal, however. Not even the same empire, as like the proverbial river of Heraclitus, you cannot step into the same empire twice.

Of course, that is perhaps implicit in their rise and fall, particularly when the fall of one empire is at the hands of the rise of another – such as when you have a tale of two empires, in a strikingly memorable phrase (for the 1945 Soviet offensive against Japan in Manchuria), one “at the absolute top of its game” and the other “dying and insane”.

So these are my Top 10 Empires of History. These are not ranked by how large, populous, rich, powerful or influential they are, but by my historical interest in them – although this tends to overlap with the former criteria. For example, of the ten largest historical empires by area at their greatest extent, all but two of them pop up in my Top 10 (with the other two in my special mentions).

Just some further notes, as with my Top 10 Wars, I have some ratings within each entry:

DECLINE & FALL

I have to admit that my particular interest in empires is not so much in their robust rise, but in their decline and fall. But again, not all empires are equal in their decline and fall. Some empires seem to collapse almost overnight, but others hold the line over incredible areas or incredible periods of time (or both), even rebounding or bouncing back. My interest is in the latter, so just how impressive or tenacious was each empire’s decline and fall?

THE EMPIRE NEVER FELL

On the other hand, rating the empires by their temporal span, particularly for that arguably never fell, or still haunt the world as ghosts or shadows.

METEORIC RISE

At the other end to the fall of empires is obviously their rise. Just as empires are not equal in their decline and fall, they are not equal in their rise. As its title indicates, this ranking rates empires by the meteoric nature of their rise, with the most meteoric being those empires that essentially rise to the full extent of their imperial power or close to it through a single founder or conqueror, as occurs uncannily often. It’s more nuanced than the “great man” theory of history but the rise of an empire often seems to hinge on the charismatic leadership, military skill, boldness, or good fortune of its founder. That often doesn’t bode well for the longevity of the empire after that – as often as not, that empire crumbles, falls apart, or fragments upon the death of its founder. Perhaps not surprisingly, the empires that have the more tenacious decline and fall of interest to me – or duration in general – tend to be those with a slow rise to power over generations or even centuries.

THE SUN NEVER SETS

Rating the wars by their geographic scale as world empire. It was famously said of one empire as descriptive of its extent that the sun never set on it. Actually it was said of at least one other empire before that, with precursors even before that, but never mind that now.

EVIL EMPIRE

Yes, yes – they’re all evil. But just how evil?

But seriously, no empire rises to or maintains its power by being nice. They do it by crushing their opponents or rebellious subjects – “they make a desolation and call it peace”. Hence rating how brutally or ruthlessly they did so – just how evil was each empire?

But also seriously, history usually does not repay moral judgements, particularly contemporary moral judgements. Almost every empire proclaims itself to be spreading civilisation or bringing some benefit to its subjects – and all but the most destructive have at least some merit in those claims. Empires were often the only means for any political unity above the tribal level, or indeed peace from inter-tribal warfare, although of course both were typically achieved by an imperial “tribe” or nation subjugating others, usually with great death or destruction, even if it subsequently absorbed or adopted the latter as citizens or soldiers of empire.

Also, prior to modern concepts of ethnic national self-determination, I tend to regard all polities as imperial in nature, at least in so far as they comprised any more than one ethnic group, and generally even in the case of more homogenous or tribal polities over their own members, in the absence of any concept of participatory representation.