98 replies to this topic

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

The second event marked the second step in which Australian seperated their power from British authority. They thus could be considered as an independent state which still maintained a strong relationship with England. By that time, Canada also strengthened their independence and British authority had been weakened since 1867, thus in principal, they were an independent state as well.

You still haven't answered whats so significance of the year 1902 to Australia and Canada. Canada was not an independent state. It had an independent internal policy, thats all. In fact, the Golden horde was more independent from the Khakhan even during Meng Ke's reign than Canada was independent from Britain in 1914.

Reason, it covered at least minimum territory in Irtych river, as I mentioned. Second, the area it covered was conventionally accepted. Thus, on the eve of WWI, British Empire, with or without Canada and Austrialian territory, is still smaller than the Mongol Empire. Only after the WWI did British Empire expand their terriotry and become the largest empire in human history.

The map I showed did include territories of the Irtysh. What conventionally accepted source are you relying on? I want to see the primary documents or archeological evidence on the control of these areas.
No, the British Empire was already larger than the Mongol empire prior to WW1. I repeat again, the Mongol empire at its largest when it was still unified did not include southern China and even if it did it was hardly 11 million sq miles unless you include a ridiculous amount of northern territory in the taiga onto the empire. Do the calculation with a computor cartography yourself.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

IIRC Herodot and Simonides recorded 4 million Persian invaders.

And in naval warfare, where combatant numbers can more accurately established through the recorded numbers of galleys, often more than 100,000 troops and rowers are recorded on each side, for example in first Punic war in the waters of Sicily. I do not see this figures in ancient Chinese historiography, not even in the usually grossly exaggerated form.

Anyway, I would go for the 7 Years Wars which many historians, including Churchill himself, view as the first World War in a true sense when Europe, India, North America and the Caribbean were war theatres.

Herodotus is a secondary source, based on second hand observation of an army. It is hardly reliable. Most modern historians estimate the Persian invading force to be 200,000-300,000. Sui's Koguryo campaign was based on government census for conscription conducted by a bureaucracy. Even allowing for miscounts and runaways, the total force couldn't have been too much off. Certainly not a gross exaggeration by a multiplying factor of 10 comparable to Herodotus' crude estimation, if estimation can even properly describe the method that he derived his numbers. The most prominent military historian of medieval chinese military in America, David Graff, estimate the Sui invasion force to be around 600,000. Still 2-3 times larger than the Persian forces that invaded Greece.

And in naval warfare, where combatant numbers can more accurately established through the recorded numbers of galleys, often more than 100,000 troops and rowers are recorded on each side, for example in first Punic war in the waters of Sicily. I do not see this figures in ancient Chinese historiography, not even in the usually grossly exaggerated form.

Then you have not read any Chinese historiography on major wars. Since rarely was there a war during dynastic struggles where one side failed to conscript up to 100,000 and often several times that number. In the battle of He Xia, Liu Bang had 300,000 force against Xiang Yu's 90,000. At Peng Cheng, the Allies had a recorded army of 560,000. However, these numbers are less reliable than the Sui Campaign of Koguryo, since not all of them were under the close scrutiny of a bureaucratic census. The Koguryo campaign had a recorded count of over 3.2 million soldiers including logistic transports. There were as much as 300,000 men involved in the naval battle of Chi Bi. The naval force during the Tang that invaded Korea was 70,000 in size. The Yuan invasion of Japan had over 150,000 naval combatants, the largest naval invasion prior to WW1.

Edited by warhead, 15 September 2007 - 04:27 PM.

[nee]

The Mongol Conquest is too broad; all battles and in which periods?

[General_Zhaoyun]

I voted the Mongols.. definitely their scale of invasion was unprecedented in world history.. and involve almost the entire globe.

[Boleslaw I]

The Mongol Conquest is too broad; all battles and in which periods?

Nee, we are discussing the Mongol conquest between 1204 to its breakdown

Warhead, I already give you my primary source from the famous book of Cambridge University. Read carefully every line again before you attempt to probe anything new for this region. For now I don't have archeological picture but I will post them soon, probably tomorrow. You cannot deny that you are already convince by my evidence. You first say thank you to me due to my vital additional information, but then edit and pretend to be more firm by fouling me with a Han's trade map, which is irrelevant to the subject matter at hand.

Now I would like to remind your behaviour. During the course of discussion you already called me as a pseud full with selectivity but lack of academic knowledge, then you call me ignorant and now you insult me with "rediculous". I am a very melleable member in CHF, perhaps one of the most ones, but that does not mean my patience is not limited. I strongly demand you to watch out your subsequent words because if next time you try to impose your thesis by insulting me again, I will not speak with you, you will deal with this problem with a moderator or administrator. I will complaint with them. Thought that a schollar who claims himself as an academic researcher must understand how to behave more than 17 years old student!

[General_Zhaoyun]

Now I would like to remind your behaviour. During the course of discussion you already called me as a pseud full with selectivity but lack of academic knowledge, then you call me ignorant and now you insult me with "rediculous".

Boleslaw, I didn't see Warhead insulting you with those words. Can you please let me have the link to your supposedly mentioned of Warhead's insulting words? Currently I only see warhead mentioning "they were ignorant" and 'they" refers to "historical figures".

Warhead, please refrain from personal insult if possible.

[arjen robben]

Nee, we are discussing the Mongol conquest between 1204 to its breakdown

Warhead, I already give you my primary source from the famous book of Cambridge University. Read carefully every line again before you attempt to probe anything new for this region. For now I don't have archeological picture but I will post them soon, probably tomorrow. You cannot deny that you are already convince by my evidence. You first say thank you to me due to my vital additional information, but then edit and pretend to be more firm by fouling me with a Han's trade map, which is irrelevant to the subject matter at hand.

Now I would like to remind your behaviour. During the course of discussion you already called me as a pseud full with selectivity but lack of academic knowledge, then you call me ignorant and now you insult me with "rediculous". I am a very melleable member in CHF, perhaps one of the most ones, but that does not mean my patience is not limited. I strongly demand you to watch out your subsequent words because if next time you try to impose your thesis by insulting me again, I will not speak with you, you will deal with this problem with a moderator or administrator. I will complaint with them. Thought that a schollar who claims himself as an academic researcher must understand how to behave more than 17 years old student!

I Voted Mongol ,dear friends Bolehsaw 1,let that guy say want he want and you shall keep your stand on you own ,i may not a active member here but i support your standyou knowledge in world history is without equal .

[Boleslaw I]

I Voted Mongol ,dear friends Bolehsaw 1,let that guy say want he want and you shall keep your stand on you own ,i may not a active member here but i support your standyou knowledge in world history is without equal .

Thank you

To GZ, post 40

As I said, I give warhead two major important sources from Kievan Rus. He does not need to cry out for the original version because I know 100 percent sure that he does not understand even how to transcript from Medieval Russian into Modern one, not mentioning from Russian to English. His map is only in Chinese, made by China. The view and opinion that he takes upon is only based upon his Chinese knowledge, and then he is audacious to extrapolate it into a much wider and much more complicated area: World History. Yet, he demonstrates laughable performance in even preserve his stance when I mention the invasion and presence of the Mongol in the Irtych river.

Perhaps he underestimates me in the field of European History. If so, he is wrong. His map is no more than a miniature, which is not standarised by any International Historical Association. I am already patient to wait for his support for more information on the map, where does it come from, which institution was it standarised? He did not answer straighforward into the question, but avert into something else.

I believe that he knows much better than anyone else what does it mean by Convention. It is an agreement generally accepted and recognised by AHA (American Historian Association) and Historical Department Of Ultretch University.

He does not have to repeat his point, because he has to deal with other calculations from the two above Association. 11.8 million squares is the area has been standarised and agreed by many famous historians, including the Winner of Pulitzer Jared Diamond. Unless he declaims that this respectable historian is only a pseud, he must GIVE ENOUGH ADEQUATE INFORMATION, not demand me to give him. So far, he did not demonstrate anything except go around and pick things up freely.

If he believes in the reversal, vote for what he believes. The major intension of this thread is to give members a moment of thought before they choose. By evaluating and synthesising information, they will have more chance to understand and justify for their answer.

First Taiping Rebellion, Second British Empire, what is next Warhead, The Republic From Star War?

Edited by Boleslaw I, 17 September 2007 - 07:41 AM.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

Nee, we are discussing the Mongol conquest between 1204 to its breakdown

Warhead, I already give you my primary source from the famous book of Cambridge University. Read carefully every line again before you attempt to probe anything new for this region. For now I don't have archeological picture but I will post them soon, probably tomorrow. You cannot deny that you are already convince by my evidence.

All you've provided was the name of a modern secondary source.(primary sources are records written during the time the event happened). If your book has evidence from a primary source, then please quote it.

You first say thank you to me due to my vital additional information, but then edit and pretend to be more firm by fouling me with a Han's trade map, which is irrelevant to the subject matter at hand.

You are confused again. What I thanked was your information with regard to the Mongol's Russian territory, not the territory north of the silk route in Western Turkestan.

Now I would like to remind your behaviour. During the course of discussion you already called me as a pseud full with selectivity but lack of academic knowledge, then you call me ignorant and now you insult me with "rediculous". I am a very melleable member in CHF, perhaps one of the most ones, but that does not mean my patience is not limited. I strongly demand you to watch out your subsequent words because if next time you try to impose your thesis by insulting me again, I will not speak with you, you will deal with this problem with a moderator or administrator. I will complaint with them. Thought that a schollar who claims himself as an academic researcher must understand how to behave more than 17 years old student!

I'm sorry, but why don't you point out the passage where I called you a "pseud full with selectivity but lack of academic knowledge", then calling you "ignorant" and then insulting you with "rediculous." The only comment I made throughout this whole thread was a comment on your selectivity about applying a double standard towards British empire and the Mongol empire. And that was never intended to be an insult, but an observed issue. Instead of telling me to stop acting like a 17 year old student, you should start by top bombasting my comments and fabricating false accusations.

Thank you

To GZ, post 40

You should carefully interpret my post. This is what I wrote:
"Care to define the respective known world? Because plenty of countries in history have conquered their entire known world.
Ignorance is not a source of strength. "

If you didn't know what I meant by "ignorance" in this setence, you should have asked instead of assuming that it was directed towards you. The ignorance here is applied to the Mongols and other countries who didn't know the world outside of their so called "world empire".

As I said, I give warhead two major important sources from Kievan Rus. He does not need to cry out for the original version because I know 100 percent sure that he does not understand even how to transcript from Medieval Russian into Modern one, not mentioning from Russian to English. His map is only in Chinese, made by China. The view and opinion that he takes upon is only based upon his Chinese knowledge, and then he is audacious to extrapolate it into a much wider and much more complicated area: World History. Yet, he demonstrates laughable performance in even preserve his stance when I mention the invasion and presence of the Mongol in the Irtych river.

Please do not fabricate words and put them into my mouth. Its called intellectual dishonesty. I merely asked you to provide a source which proved Mongol control north of the Silk route. I never upheld the believe that my map is 100% correct. I only stated it is a much more reliable map then the other one. If you can't, you do not have to attack me.

He does not have to repeat his point, because he has to deal with other calculations from the two above Association. 11.8 million squares is the area has been standarised and agreed by many famous historians, including the Winner of Pulitzer Jared Diamond. Unless he declaims that this respectable historian is only a pseud, he must GIVE ENOUGH ADEQUATE INFORMATION, not demand me to give him. So far, he did not demonstrate anything except go around and pick things up freely.

If he believes in the reversal, vote for what he believes. The major intension of this thread is to give members a moment of thought before they choose. By evaluating and synthesising information, they will have more chance to understand and justify for their answer.

I already dealt with your information, and as I've stated already, the 11.8 million mile is an exaggeration for two reasons:
1. it includes southern china, when the Mongol empire already fragmented as early as 1260. Hence there is no such a thing as a unified Mongol empire.
2. it includes the taiga territory north of lake baikal, when there were no evidence whatsoever that the Mongols actually had control over it. Whether you include all of the Irtysh territory or not, the Mongol empire was smaller than the British Empire, both after and immediately before world war 1.

The fact of the matter is, the Mongol conquests was less than the British Conquest in the same time span. And right now you are not doing a brilliant job of debunking it.

If he believes in the reversal, vote for what he believes. The major intension of this thread is to give members a moment of thought before they choose. By evaluating and synthesising information, they will have more chance to understand and justify for their answer.

First Taiping Rebellion, Second British Empire, what next? The Republic From Star War?

The Taiping is the most destructive war, the British Empire is the largest empire, these are simple facts. Your thread title was unclear, blame it on yourself if others did not follow your line of thinking. As for the Republic from star wars, if you believe its real, be my guest. It is afterall, in a galaxy long long time ago and far far away. So I guess it qualifies at least as ci-fi history.

Edited by warhead, 17 September 2007 - 01:39 PM.

[Boleslaw I]

It is not my responsibility to ask you what do you mean, it is your responsibility to make clear what do you mean correct yourself with English grammar and avoid fragment sentences.

Primary Chronicle, 1245, Verse 144

"I saw a fearful silence from the church
I saw no eagles in the blue sky
Tearful the day of judgement
On which the horde of evil
Rise again from ashes
Sent us to the vile dust
From whence we sprung
Blends our blood with the blue Irtych
..."

Primary Chronicle, 1245, Verse 566

"...Our wealth hath gone to Nothingness
our gold hath been ripped off by those evils
And the path to Sogdiana became bygone"

Original depiction from Hermitage Museum Of Saint Petersburg (Санкт-Петербу́рг)



The third one, right corner, a Tarta-Mongol cavalry (Grand Chronicle, 1252, p.644-645)
Medieval Russia's Epics, Chronicles and Tales: Revised and Enlarged Edition

Source: The Book above and Medieval Russia's Epics, Chronicles and Tales: Revised and Enlarged Edition , Warsaw National Library

Anthing more to say?!, huh, I am already tired with your inconsistency and your lackluster performance in demonstrating true understanding of World History in general and Kievan-Rus History in particular. You have nothing in your hand except a map from China made anonimously without standarisation from any institution, yet you still shout out loud and call out attention of everybody for nothing. Yet you still call your map as much more reliable.

Deal with 11.8 million squares? Deal with it by what way, wandering your fingers in the keyboard with your computer or buy numerous tickets to each place I mentioned and record into your notebooks from those local museums?

Lucky for you that you are debating with a 17 Boleslaw, who is only an enthusiastic student. I wonder if you encounter the same issue with Jubelu who is a successful Graduate in the field of Nomadic Military History or Bessilarius who are Phd contributes a lot to American Historian Association's journals, what is going to happen?

As said, if you cannot give any valid source to negate my evidence, and if you are no longer interest in this Poll, I will open new discussion for our members to justify other choices, this discussion went enough long to give our audience who is fullfilled with his specialty.

Edited by Boleslaw I, 17 September 2007 - 12:10 PM.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

It is not my responsibility to ask you what do you mean, it is your responsibility to make clear what do you mean correct yourself with English grammar and avoid fragment sentences.

It is not my responsible if you can't interpret simple English grammar when its perfectly correct. Fragmented, yes, but it was consistently tied to the rest of the sentence and there certainly wasn't anything in the post that was directed towards you. You just assumed so out of paranoia. Just admit the fact that you misinterpreted my post and end this impertinent BS.

Primary Chronicle, 1245, Verse 144

"I saw a fearful silence from the church
I saw no eagles in the blue sky
Tearful the day of judgement
On which the horde of evil
Rise again from ashes
Sent us to the vile dust
From whence we sprung
Blends our blood with the blue Irtych

You are just arguing in circles. Where did it state that this is in northern Irtysh? You do realize that Irtysh is a long river which extends to just a few hundred miles off of the north of Lake Balkash right? And southern Irtysh was already shown on my map to be part of the Mongol dominion, a map which you claimed to be limited simply because it was Chinese as if Chinese historians couldn't possibly have any knowledge of Russian history.

Primary Chronicle, 1245, Verse 566

"...Our wealth hath gone to Nothingness
our gold hath been ripped off by those evils
And the path to Sogdiana became bygone"


The third one, right corner, a Tarta-Mongol cavalry (Grand Chronicle, 1252, p.644-645)
Medieval Russia's Epics, Chronicles and Tales: Revised and Enlarged Edition

Source: The Book above and Medieval Russia's Epics, Chronicles and Tales: Revised and Enlarged Edition , Warsaw National Library

Do you know where Sogdiana is? Its not at the the Urals or north of the silk route. This is where it is: http://en.wikipedia....iana-300BCE.png

Anthing more to say?!,

How about citing the relevant source about how the Mongols had control of territory at northern Irtysh.

Edited by warhead, 17 September 2007 - 01:51 PM.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

huh, I am already tired with your inconsistency and your lackluster performance in demonstrating true understanding of World History in general and Kievan-Rus History in particular. You have nothing in your hand except a map from China made anonimously without standarisation from any institution, yet you still shout out loud and call out attention of everybody for nothing. Yet you still call your map as much more reliable.

You will only torment yourself further if you continue to misinterpret my post. Blame yourself for your own fatigue. No where did I pretended that I was an expert in Kievan history or did I said that my map was the best map available, so stop the empty and irrelevant ad-hominem attacks, especially since you haven't demonstrated any high competence in this field either, at least not by the irrelevant evidence that you've presented so far.
Furthermore, at least grasp the point why I posted that map. Its to show that there are different map versions of the Mongol empire and the second map was more reliable than the first. Did I say the second map is impeccable? No. So stop putting words in my mouth. What I said was that its more reliable then the other map I posted.(which showed a ridiculous amount of territory in the taiga, and you even stated yourself that it was ridiculous.) Read back, if you forgot.

Deal with 11.8 million squares? Deal with it by what way, wandering your fingers in the keyboard with your computer or buy numerous tickets to each place I mentioned and record into your notebooks from those local museums?

Deal with the fact that there wasn't a single Mongol empire after 1260 and that there is no archeological evidence whatsoever that the Mongols reached the Taiga or north of baikal. Deal with the fact that the British empire was larger and conquered a larger territory in the same breadth of time. Deal with the fact that you made a double standard in the beginning of this thread with regard to conquests.

Lucky for you that you are debating with a 17 Boleslaw, who is only an enthusiastic student. I wonder if you encounter the same issue with Jubelu who is a successful Graduate in the field of Nomadic Military History or Bessilarius who are Phd contributes a lot to American Historian Association's journals, what is going to happen?

Maybe they'll actually stick to the topic, provide relevant archeological facts, and not misinterpret my posts. No where did I uphold my believe that the map was completely correct, I merely want your source where it stated the Mongols extended to northern Irtysh. If you could, great, I would learn something new. But you haven't. But as I said before, even if they extended to that area, the British Empire was still larger. You don't appear to have an idea how large the figure 11.8 million sq miles is. Its the size of the entire former Soviet Union, Mongolia, China and the two Koreas combined. For the Mongol empire to reach 11.8 million sq mile, it must have included the Taiga north of Baikal. Calculate the geography with a computor program yourself.

As said, if you cannot give any valid source to negate my evidence, and if you are no longer interest in this Poll, I will open new discussion for our members to justify other choices, this discussion went enough long to give our audience who is fullfilled with his specialty

Excuse me, but its up to the assertive side to provide the evidence. And so far, you've provided no evidence on how the Mongols controlled the territories at northern Irtysh, north of lake Baikal or north of the silk route. The figure of 11.8 million sq miles you casually throw around might fool people who do are not keen in geography. But its not going to fool anyone who has a good grasp of geographical area; they know that even the map you've presented in post #77, the total territory is hardly 8.5 million sq miles by just looking at it. In fact, its actually smaller than then the map I've posted, since it neglected the Ussuri region and southern China. Like I said, if you have any doubts about the size, use a computor mapping program to calculate it. This is not about history, but an issue of geography.

Edited by warhead, 17 September 2007 - 02:06 PM.

[Boleslaw I]

Here:

Primary Chronicle, verse: 256

Old Novgrod is shaken in winter
The Neva blends with red storm
The unshakable wall of Kiev
Collapses under the thunder stone
Oh the heart of land
is already tore down by slashes
Of Hordes of Evils
Horses to the left, horses to the right
Swept death from Chernigov
To the small ruinous Samara
...

I already give you even three verses from Primary Chronicle, now it is your turn to provide any piece of Journal that negate the existence of the Mongol control in Irtysh river, and stop yelling at geograhical facts, I know bloody well those areas, and even I can speak out from these sources that the trading contact of Kievan Rus wider than everything you could imagine.

If you could, great, I would learn something new

I doubt that you could learn something if you do not look at the fact that Kievan Rus source gives us much more potential view on Mongolian control than what we could think of.

Stop fouling by convicting me disagree in the matter of Lake Balkan, I already stated that I have no disagreement toward that problem. It could be said nearly all Kazakhstan was under the control of the Turkic-Mongol Empire. Thus, if you want to NEGATE my source, prove them wrong!

I am not the assertive side, it is you who start this discussion with the irrelevant Taiping Rebellion first, don't push your responsibility to me.

the total territory is hardly 8.5 million sq miles by just looking at it

Are you a robot? Are you a machine?

Russian territory alone is: 17,075,400, just divide this into 3 we already get: 5691800 sq miles, adding 2,669,800 of Kazakhstan, China total today area: 9,596,960 divided by 4 = 2999240, adding Iran area: 636,372 and Iraq: 172,742 = 12166466 sq mile, just roughly , sure that I don't "just" look at it, great look for your eyes, warhead

This estimation is closed to the rough one in Wiki, which is where you always guide me to, if I only take down to 11.86 million square kilometers, that is still reasonable. Remmeber divide them transversly, not longitudinally. You say JUST LOOK AT IT, very good action of a "professionl schollar", who would like to teach Geography. Even when look at the map without special technology, you do not know how to process the data as a Geographical Elementary Student, yet you still claim yourself as a "good grasp person"

As I said, I will post some archeological finds, just be patient.

Edited by Boleslaw I, 18 September 2007 - 12:35 AM.

[Boleslaw I]

Source: The mythical Mongols - Xavier Sherman - Central European History Vol 34, Cambridge Journals

Anything else to say sir, want to have textual writtings, there, want to have unequivocal archeological finds, there. Hopefully this time you won't turn your eyes into me and say: "Do you even know where is the intersection of Irtysh River and Obi one?".
Compare to your position, you does not have even a single piece of paper to prove your negation. Yet, still suprisingly cry out loud.

Please remember one thing when you say I'm trying to FOUL OTHER MEMBERS, I did not even CARE use their choice to fight against your vague attacks. I DID NOT EVEN SUBJECTIVELY USE their support to prove against you. It is all their observation, objectively.

If you call my evidence as irrelevant, look at yours, not 0 but -0. You start a wrong perception, it is time to correct it. First, you asked me to affirm the domination in Irtych river, secondly Northern, what is next, outerspace??

I have a feeling that the elusive story of Kenneth and BeeJay repeated right again here. Interesting enough to laugh fairly hard! I will press this issue until you have no where to run with your mistical conception. First time I already tried to abandon this discussion by telling you that it is your own choice and I want no more discussion on the topic, but thanks for increase my resolution. Perhaps for long you have not tasted any strong defense. Let's replay the drama of Kenneth and Beejay, warhead. We will see how you are going to justify without a single academic paper (Oh, a map picked up from Google and another one from Han dynasty). And how you are going to convince our audience without citing reliable sources. Although Wujiang already resign, I think it would be fair to apply his 3S Rule.

Edited by Boleslaw I, 18 September 2007 - 12:36 AM.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

I already give you even three verses from Primary Chronicle, now it is your turn to provide any piece of Journal that negate the existence of the Mongol control in Irtysh river, and stop yelling at geograhical facts, I know bloody well those areas, and even I can speak out from these sources that the trading contact of Kievan Rus wider than everything you could imagine.

Three irrelevant verses that contradicts nothing on my map. Furthermore, I never stated that the Mongols didn't control the Irtysh, or even the northern Irtysh, why did you assume that I did? I said they didn't control the Taiga territories.

I doubt that you could learn something if you do not look at the fact that Kievan Rus source gives us much more potential view on Mongolian control than what we could think of.

Instead of wasting time bickering, why don't you show the sources that debunks my second map. I never said it was impeccable, I only stated it was more reliable then the first. Its possible that the map you presented on post #77 is more accurate than this one, I never refuted that, I only want your evidence. Yet even that map is barely 8.5 million sq miles.

Stop fouling by convicting me disagree in the matter of Lake Balkan, I already stated that I have no disagreement toward that problem. It could be said nearly all Kazakhstan was under the control of the Turkic-Mongol Empire. Thus, if you want to NEGATE my source, prove them wrong!

Then what are you disagreeing about? My second map? First off I never stated my second map is absolutely correct, the point of me presenting the second map is to prove that there are more than one version of the map, and that the 11.8 sq mile figure you threw around is more consistent with the first map that I provided, which did include the Taiga.
Second of all, you stated my second map is wrong, but you have yet to provide a single source which proved that its wrong. My second map also showed that the Mongols controled the Irtysh as well as Sogdiana, so let me ask you again, where was my second map incorrect?

I am not the assertive side, it is you who start this discussion with the irrelevant Taiping Rebellion first, don't push your responsibility to me.

Umm no, the topic of this thread was the largest conflict. You didn't specify what you meant by it. Hence I brought up Tai Ping rebelion which was the most destructive conflict, hence the largest in that sense. It is not irrelevant to this topic.

Are you a robot? Are you a machine?

No, just someone with a much better grasp of geography than you as can be seen from your erroneous estimation below:

Russian territory alone is: 17,075,400, just divide this into 3 we already get: 5691800 sq miles, adding 2,669,800 of Kazakhstan, China total today area: 9,596,960 divided by 4 = 2999240, adding Iran area: 636,372 and Iraq: 172,742 = 12166466 sq mile, just roughly , sure that I don't "just" look at it, great look for your eyes, warhead

That was pitiful. If you want to estimate, the least you should do is get your measurements correct. It only makes your mockery sound frivolous. A geographer could tell the rough proximation of territories with their eyes precisely because they memorized the geographical size of every country in Asia already. You are obviously no geographer, thats why I told you to use a computor mapping program for starters. (I already have computor estimations that are far more accurate than yours, the comment on the eye was merely to show you how much more competent a more experienced geographer is than you. Yet you fatuously distorted it and used it as a weapon against me, how facetious.)
Russia is 17,075,400 sq km, not sq miles. In terms of sq miles, its 6.6 million. Similarily China is roughly 3.7 million sq miles not 9,596,960.

The territory of the former Soviet Union is roughly 8,650,000 sq. miles. (22,400,000 sq. km.) Even by assuming that the Mongol empire controlled as much as half of the former Soviet Union using your map in post #77(yet by assuming it controlled as much as half of the Soviet Union is already exaggerating its size, since the Taiga biome makes up over 3/4 of the Soviet Union's territory. The nomads of Mongolia only used lake baikal, in the taiga itself, as a ground for retreat or exile throughout history, not as a pasture ground.) That would be around 4,300,000 sq miles, adding Iran's 636,372 sq miles , Iraq(which the Monol empire did not control all of, it stopped at the twin rivers), around 150,000 sq miles, China; 3.7 million sq miles,(and as I repeat again, the Mongols didn't control southern China when it was united) Korea, 87,000 sq miles, Mongolia, 600,000 sq miles, Afghanistan; 250,000 sq miles, Half of Pakistan; 150,000 square miles the total territory is roughly 9.8 million sq miles. And even that figure is an overestimate.

This estimation is closed to the rough one in Wiki, which is where you always guide me to, if I only take down to 11.86 million square kilometers, that is still reasonable. Remmeber divide them transversly, not longitudinally.

I guided to you to wiki, once, to show you why your source on Sogdiana was irrelevant to this thread.

You say JUST LOOK AT IT, very good action of a "professionl schollar", who would like to teach Geography. Even when look at the map without special technology, you do not know how to process the data as a Geographical Elementary Student, yet you still claim yourself as a "good grasp person"

Too big of a mouth could lead you to irrevocable consequences. Your estimation above was embarrassing.

Edited by warhead, 18 September 2007 - 11:10 PM.