Spain: the World's Most Powerful Empire in 1585?????? - Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007) Discussion

[–] JankaJaakari 17 years ago

Well said.

reply

[–] theflyingcow 17 years ago

More accurate would have been "the KNOWN world" as very little was known about China in 16th century Europe. To say Spain was the most powerful empire in Europe would have ignored its global impact.

"If this be a natural thing, where do it come from, where do it go?"

reply

[–] enriquegoni 15 years ago

Nonsense. Spain was much more powerful than China. Spain and Portugal had colonies in mainland China. Chinese could not even defend their territory from Spain, while Spain was not only able to defend but to conquer 1/5 of the world. There is a bias against Spanish due to all of the English propaganda in your english speaking countries, but the truth is the truth and your propaganda cannot change it. Spain was the most powerful country in the world until 1714 when she lost the european territories of holland, belgium and italy. That is a lot more time than any English speaking country has ever done. Maybe that is why you are jealous and try to change history.

reply

[–] adeherrpal 14 years ago

Spain was the most powerful country in the world until the middle of the XVII century not until 1714. If Spain didn't loose the netherlands before the War of Spanish Succsion was thanks to the coalitions against the expansionist policies of Louis XIV. The spanish armies in the 60's of the XVII century were defeated by Portugal not even mention France whose armies were 20 times the armies Spain could mobilize and the navy was rooten. Have you not heard about the crisis in the reign of Carlos II.

reply

[–] enriquegoni 14 years ago

Maybe france had land superiority (in Europe) the second half of the XVII century, but Louis XIV only managed to take Franche Compté from Spain (with English help), while he lost Luxembourg, Chimay, Mons, Coutrai, Charleroi to Spain. If Spain "lost" the Portuguese war of independence in 1640 was because Spain was fighting vs all Europe. When coming to the navy, Spanish one was clearly superior. When coming to global power, also Spain was superior to France.

reply

[–] anticaria 10 years ago

Nonsense. Spain was much more powerful than China. Spain and Portugal had colonies in mainland China. Chinese could not even defend their territory from Spain, while Spain was not only able to defend but to conquer 1/5 of the world. There is a bias against Spanish due to all of the English propaganda in your english speaking countries, but the truth is the truth and your propaganda cannot change it. Spain was the most powerful country in the world until 1714 when she lost the european territories of holland, belgium and italy. That is a lot more time than any English speaking country has ever done. Maybe that is why you are jealous and try to change history.

well said indeed!

it wasn't the fall from her 16th-floor penthouse that killed her, it was the landing

reply

[–] Phidippides 17 years ago

Do you have evidence to support your claim that China during the Ming dynasty was more powerful than Spain at its height of power?

My history forum @http://www.westerncivforum.com

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 17 years ago

As guy who supports his own history forum in discussion board about movies you are not very reliable source in anything. It is absolutely pitiful that even after 400 years there are people still clinging on past glories. Argument of Spain being most powerful nation of time can be contested by many nations at time.

reply

[–] Phidippides 17 years ago

What in the world are you talking about, and why are you criticizing anything about me being a "reliable source"? Why do you ASSUME I think anything in particular about Spain? I asked you a simple question that was meant to be a simple question and you start getting all defensive.

I repeat myself - what evidence can you refer to which supports your original claim?

My history forum @http://www.westerncivforum.com

reply

[–] rahrahranger 16 years ago

why are men so competitive?

reply

[–] yimin612 17 years ago

Please look up Britannica Encyclopedia:

Ming China drove the Mongols back to Inner Asia and established a vast empire in the mid-1300's. The mid-1400's naval expeditions that reached remote areas as East Africa were the earliest of their kind. Portugal, Spain, and Netherland were all part of the notorious tributary system of Ming China.

"The Ming Dynasty lasted from 1367 till 1644. During a period of great economic and technological change in the world, its decline, though clear in retrospect, was not obvious at the time. Even when it fell, Ming China was arguably the richest and most populous nation in the world..."

I think this is a fair recognition that despite a changing world, 17th century China was still the most powerful due to its sheer size and traditional advancement. Even today's China is the 2nd largest economy in the world, with the first military force that had forced the US to negotiation in a modern war... This nation certainly has a great past, and probably a comeback potential.

Hollywood had a slip of word again: Spain cannot be the world's most powerful empire, ever. It was, indeed, for a while the most powerful outside of Asia.

reply

[–] Phidippides 17 years ago

China during the Ming Dynasty did not extend to the same geographic area as we see China today. Perhaps because of the Taoist, Confucian, and Buddhist culture, China during the Ming did not extend its empire to far reaches of the globe (as far as I'm aware). I do realize that it had a thriving cultural base in areas such as Suzhou but I do not see how the claim can be made that China was the most "powerful" empire in the world around the time of the Spanish Armada.

Your point may possibly be true but I don't how it is necessarily true. As you say, the point is "arguable".

My history forum @http://www.westerncivforum.com

reply

[–] acheron33 17 years ago

How china was the most powerfull empire...

spain was the first global empire of the mankind and the last european one .

spain fougth on asia defeating pirates and atleats 5 times defeated and took over chinese forces.

spain at his heigth was on war with 34 nations and they resisted for 58 years feat than no other nation had acomplished if we think they where on figth with ottoman empire the french the turks the english the african pirate states . america native rising like mpauches, the protestant germany states the sweden , dk , japanese pirates ....

if we belong to simple power 1 vs 1 and took the problems of europe spain would have end with china easily with a modern army , more powerfull artillery, modern ships , regular seasoned infantry, massive gold profit , from america .

by far on 1647 spain was the main buyer of products on china followed by the portuguese and the dutchs.

Tell me dude what happened when the chinese attemped to invade manila on 1638 .

i will tell you . 1500 spanish militias 36 cannons , 7 galleons where enough to vanquish the force of 15,000 chinese bringed by the general, mercenary pirate tseng liao .

today u can see the chinese weapons on spanish military musseum on madrid and 3 cannons wich where worse than the europeans ones from 1390.

China ahs been a long dead rotten corpse till 20 century.

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 17 years ago

You are so full of it. Yes Spain was pretty powerful in its halcion days (hundreds years past now so HEY HELLO welcome back to reality and past is past). Eastern cultures have all ways been more advaced at the time (except since industrial revolution which by chance was led by Brits). Example: I do not know exactly when first Spanish book about cooking or cuisine was produced how ever I know that first Chinese version was made couple hundred years B.C. You were arguing something over inferiority of Chinese cannons compared to Spanish ones so can you answer that where oh where was the black powder used in those Spanish cannons invented in ? Since Spain is so all powerful and mighty nation etc. so why in heavens sake they got bitch slapped to silly in Spanish-American War ?

reply

[–] acheron33 17 years ago

you are nob sir. we are here talking about History . something u dont realize.

Maybe the chinese did crafted the powder but the europeans mastered it and make it more powerfull.
i dont know how a cook book could make a difference on the warfare.

we are talking of 16 and 17 century . not 19 century . spanish empire lasted 400 years . america is prety much younger and we will not see for se it fall.

why spanish lost the war ? prety easy it was rotten and on pure decay . very strong to pick up a worthy enemy ehh.

Btw if u are from u.s maybe you should start thinking than was spanish the one than proved more to support your nation.

we spend more money suplys soldiers navy , weapons than frenchs. and we actualy helped yours on true land battles. who feed the rebels army? we . who open the missipy to provide cloth to your soldiers . we. who send food to stop the war famine on your country that would end with no much americans to celebrate the victory ? we.

youa re proud to go to war and kill people for a lie ? or youa re the clasic red neck than still thinking we sunk the maine ?.

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 17 years ago

"you are nob sir. we are here talking about History . something u dont realize."

"Maybe the chinese did crafted the powder but the europeans mastered it and make it more powerfull.
i dont know how a cook book could make a difference on the warfare."

Well one could all most though that Empires and civilisations are for nothing put battles and conquest... BUT THEY ARE NOT. Chinese GREATED CULTURES and CULTURAL INFLUENCES and TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES where as Spaniards merely applicated them to benefit their own rise.

"we are talking of 16 and 17 century . not 19 century . spanish empire lasted 400 years . america is prety much younger and we will not see for se it fall."

Do you really wish to see U.S fall ?

"why spanish lost the war ? prety easy it was rotten and on pure decay."

Maybe they were that even in their halcion days ? Rise of Spanish Empire can be attributed to numerous factors (Many of them comimng out side of Spain) but their fall can be attributed solely to their own actions.

"Btw if u are from u.s maybe you should start thinking than was spanish the one than proved more to support your nation."

Sorry no luck there but I do visit U.S regulary. Well I do not know about Spanish as group but you my friends surely do not sound like supporter of U.S so what is point bringing this up since you are not one of them.

"we spend more money suplys soldiers navy , weapons than frenchs. and we actualy helped yours on true land battles. who feed the rebels army? we . who open the missipy to provide cloth to your soldiers . we. who send food to stop the war famine on your country that would end with no much americans to celebrate the victory ? we."

And yet even that French are generally considerd to be "cheese eating surrender monkeys" in U.S they are considered to be better fighting force than anything than Spanish can came up.

"youa re proud to go to war and kill people for a lie ? or youa re the clasic red neck than still thinking we sunk the maine ?."

And again NO I AN not from U.S. and like Spaniards did not butcher entire civilsations for A LIE in their halcion days ? Yes Spain was mighty Empire in its halcion days but you (nor any of Spaniard of this date) my friend had nothing to do with that. Be as proud of your historical heritage but do not expect me to give sI-Iit about it.

reply

[–] wsered1 16 years ago

The Spanish-American War was 300 years later. FAIL.

reply

[–] JohnnyFrench 16 years ago

Spain more or less powerful than China in the 1580 ? It depends on what you intend by "powerful". China had much more inhabitants, even if she wasn't as big as today. But, remind this : Spain was a world power. Spanish possesions covered about 15 to 20% of the emerged world at this time. And she had a very powerful fleet, even after the failure of the invincible Armada.

In comparison, China was a regional power, for good part because she was'nt interested in knowing and discovering the world. Of course, she could have conquered the New World, as Spain did. But she didn't.

reply

[–] xav_gsup 16 years ago

Japan has the 2nd largest economy in the world... Germany is 3rd Great Britain 4th France 5th and China 6th... to this day

reply

[–] philhhs 16 years ago

CIA World Factbook 2008, China is 3rd and UK is 6th. The current version (online) has China at 2.

reply

[–] greekdish 14 years ago

What is the measure of the best economy?? Overall GDP?? Yes, then China is 2nd.

When you think about it....China has the largest population though. 1.3 billion people. When you factor in average GDP per capita.....

USA - $46,980
Japan - $42,647
Germany - $40,583

China - $4,390

Its not even close

reply

[–] adeherrpal 14 years ago

"Portugal, Spain, and Netherland were all part of the notorious tributary system of Ming China"

Could you explain better this subject. I don't get it.

"I think this is a fair recognition that despite a changing world, 17th century China was still the most powerful due to its sheer size and traditional advancement. Even today's China is the 2nd largest economy in the world, with the first military force that had forced the US to negotiation in a modern war... This nation certainly has a great past, and probably a comeback potential."

China was nothing compare to the spanish empire. The spanish armies in that time were invincible. Spain fought at the same time with France, England, the Netherlands, Turks, German protestants and only a few times was defeated. We are talking about XVI century not XXI century.

"Spain cannot be the world's most powerful empire, ever. It was, indeed, for a while the most powerful outside of Asia."

Spain was the most powerful country in Europe, America,parts of Africa, Asia or Oceania, the Pacific was a spanish lake. Which was the influece of China ?

reply

[–] anticaria 17 years ago

of course spain was the most powerful nation in the world at the time, and by extension, the world's most powerful.. and the reason is obvious: spain's military, political, economic, cultural, and spiritual influence was felt in both of the world's hemispheres and across all of the world's oceans, especially between 1580-1640, when spain and portugal were unified under philip II to form the greatest overseas, trans-oceanic empire in the entire history of the world. modern economic trends had their birth within the spanish empire of the 16th century, such as 'global' trade routes, the first 'global' currency, 'global' inflation, the columbian exchange, etc.. were all economic and cultural trends initiated by the 16th-century spaniards. 16th-century spain laid the economic groundwork for the modern 'global' mercantilist, capitalist economy we know today. china's sphere of imperial influence was still largely land-based, whereas spain's stretched across the entire world, and not just in terms of economic indicators, but also in terms of cultural and spiritual indicators. it is after all no accident that the greatest catholic missionary ever and indeed the first truly 'global' apostle was the spanish jesuit saint francis xavier, a man regarded as the patron saint of missionaries and premier apostle of catholism in the far east, and the man who speerheaded catholic incursions into japan and china. spain's 'global' influence was undisputed at the time.

in econimic terms, the spanish empire established and alone sustained the first truly 'global' economy and first globally-traded currency. need anything else be said on this issue? no, of course not.. that alone speaks for itself.

however, speaking in terms of military might, spain waged war and did so successfully on more fronts, thanks to its feared 'tercios,' than any other nation on the planet at the time. this was of course a direct result of the sheer geographic vastness of the spanish empire's far-flung possessions.. an empire which stretched across europe and the rest of the world like no other, one which was beset by piracy and yet managed to keep it at bay all around the world, and one whose treasure fleets were also constantly being depleated by natural disasters and the like. yet, despite all of these setbacks, the sheer amount of traded goods and raw wealth the spanish managed to 'move' and keep in circulation across the world's oceans is simply staggering, a fact which speaks extremely highly of the monstrously vast and powerful system of overseas fortified ports that protected the lifeblood of the spanish empire's economic machine.

as if that were not enough, if on top of all the countless burdens the spanish empire was able to absorb and sustain at the time, we add the armada enterprise, the largest of its kind in the history of the world, we gain a clearer sense for the sheer undisputed military might this nation wielded at the time.

truly no other nation even came close.

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 17 years ago

Too long and to long winded answers dear Spaniards. What I found funny is how you Spaniards so often (nearly all ways to be excact) forget to mention certain factors and influence in the made great contributions in issues what made Spain great power or great Empire. Reason why those factors and those influences and technological advances are not often mentioned are that they came from Islamic cultures and Islamic cultures in their turn were influenced by oriental cultures.

Spain was great empire but IMO it would have been better if it would not have been. So I see it as poetic justice that culture that destroyed and trampled so many other cultures were reduced to status of 3rd world nation in global importance and to punching bag in matters of military might. Also ponder this for moment greatest and mightiest sI-Iit in the world is still a sI-Iit

reply

[–] Sid-Blitzen 17 years ago

"Reason why those factors and those influences and technological advances are not often mentioned are that they came from Islamic cultures and Islamic cultures in their turn were influenced by oriental cultures".

Hey, if the Orientals were so sophisticated, how come the Europeans always beat hell out of them? Maybe sophistication is somewhat overrated? Maybe an ability to vanquish one's enemies is better?

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 17 years ago

Ignorance is bliss it seem. "Maybe an ability to vanquish one's enemies is better" then again may be not are you familiar of term "Pyrrhic Victory" and are you aware where it cames from and what it means... It means might and military prowness can still dissolve to nothingness and it all ways will if there are not base (and not meaning Military bases here) to support it. Spain become ONE (and I say one be chose the claim can be contested but if we are simply measuring sizes of cocks.. sorry meant write cannons then Spaniards had biggest ones at time) of the most dominant empires its time bechose they had both.

"Orientals were so sophisticated, how come the Europeans always beat hell out of them?" Please due tell me that what fate fell upon Constantinoples and what culture conquered it as well as Balkan far up to gates of Vienna (It is irrelevant argue over terms of Arab, Islamic, Turk or Oriental for what ever you call it it was culture of Asian origin and it finished off great Christian empire in Europe and added injury to insult this empire happened to be succesor of mighty Roman Empire The Mighties western civilization to excist to date). Europeans and Americans did not beat hell out of Orientals in Korea duiring Korean War they recieved as well gived and what about Mongols are they not orientals ? Mongol empire and greatness of their conquests exceeds even Spaniards in their halcion days by leagues.

reply

[–] roman8 17 years ago

You realise, of course, that the 'fate' that 'fell' Constantinople was the deviation of the 4th Crusade in 1204. The Byzantine Empire never recovered from it, lingered on for 250 more years always on the verge of collapse and was easy prey for Mehmet the Great in 1453.

As to China: you are right in just about everything you said about the Chinese, however your interpretaton is still a bit off. The reference to Spain as 'the most powerful nation on Earth' was clearly indicating Spain as a world power. For a state to be considered one, it needs - all civilisatorian achievements set aside - first and foremost to operate as such, meaning it needs to set up a long-term strategy aimed at obtaining and maintaining global impact, influence and supremacy. China never did really. Spain, on the other hand, did so very much.

That sat aside: the historical inaccuracies in this movie are, of course, ridiculous.

reply

[–] anticaria 17 years ago

<<<Too long and to long winded answers dear Spaniards. What I found funny is how you Spaniards so often (nearly all ways to be excact) forget to mention certain factors and influence in the made great contributions in issues what made Spain great power or great Empire. Reason why those factors and those influences and technological advances are not often mentioned are that they came from Islamic cultures and Islamic cultures in their turn were influenced by oriental cultures.

Spain was great empire but IMO it would have been better if it would not have been. So I see it as poetic justice that culture that destroyed and trampled so many other cultures were reduced to status of 3rd world nation in global importance and to punching bag in matters of military might. Also ponder this for moment greatest and mightiest sI-Iit in the world is still a sI-Iit.>>>

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz totally off-topic diatribe. here's the actual question that was asked: was spain the world's most powerful empire in 1585? the answer is yes, since the entire iberian peninsula (both spanish and portuguese imperial spheres of influence combined) was unified under the spanish habsburgs from 1580-1640. next! ;-)

reply

[–] acheron33 17 years ago

Too long and to long winded answers dear Spaniards. What I found funny is how you Spaniards so often (nearly all ways to be excact) forget to mention certain factors and influence in the made great contributions in issues what made Spain great power or great Empire. Reason why those factors and those influences and technological advances are not often mentioned are that they came from Islamic cultures and Islamic cultures in their turn were influenced by oriental cultures.

yes figthing the muslims shape our armys and generals on early 16 century also we begins to use the gunwpowder agaisnt them and begins to rely on infantry more than the clasic corps of cavalry .

for example the english archers where a elite corps but the spanish infantry was pure and simple a common force of reliable and strong because every man was under the law than he could be summoned to the war .

for this spain was so differents our nobility specially the lesser one was breed on warfare.

the muslims did not affect very well the spaniards the figth agaisnt them turn urs kingdowns on religion zealots at some point than nowdays like the usa claim they are the main defenders of the democracy (and everyone bash /hate them) we used to be the paladin of the cristian forces and by such we had to go agaisnt every protestants muslim or whatever thing menaced the cristianity.

reply

[–] msrafam2 16 years ago

3rd world nation in global importance ? Well, at least we don't have the reputation of being the most boring nation in the world, I'm afraid that prize goes your way.

Also, before you insult people's intelligence as well as their country, look a bit at the pitiful record of your own nation, always subjugated by its neighbours THROUGHOUT ALL OF ITS HISTORY. No need to go that far, at that, you'd be all speaking Russian or German if it wasn't for the Brits and the Americans. Can't see how your loved Chinese helped there.

Talking about the Chinese, your mobile phone business ain't going that far either, so start soon looking for a new job ! (perhaps a good start at that would be to improve your drafting skills)

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] anticaria 15 years ago

"""Too long and to long winded answers dear Spaniards."""

lol it's really hilarious how the minute someone totally disproves your argument and you find yourself completely unable to dispute any of the numerous facts presented to you, the intellectually challenged always plead 'mental laziness' and pretend to be suddenly too tired to read.. priceless! ;-D

i'll have to remember that little 'trick' next time.. <g>

reply

[–] Sid-Blitzen 17 years ago

"Big caption at the beginning of this movie says: Spain was the most powerful empire in the WORLD. This is too much".

Maybe it was about bigging-up Elizabeth? Her victory is all the greater if her foe is the world's greatest empire.
But China? Well, it was big, but how powerful? How unified? How strongly-ruled from the centre? If the Last Emperor is anything to go by, Chinese emperors seem to have been a powerless bunch.
Could an imperial Chinese army of the 1580s have gone the distance with Spain?

reply

[–] Phidippides 17 years ago

That is the thing - I don't think that China was unified at that time. Yes, China during the Ming dynasty (ending in 1644) may have been culturally significant and even powerful militarily, but this is not to say that it was *more* powerful than Spain was during the lat 16th century. Did China colonize distant lands like Spain did? Did China have a stream of gold and resources from such colonies like Spain? I don't think so. I agree that China, such as in the city of Suzhou, was significant in size but I don't think that population alone equates to strength.

My history forum @http://www.westerncivforum.com

reply

[–] raistlin903 17 years ago

wow the gramatical and spelling errors in this thread are some of the worst i've ever seen..................

reply

[–] Sid-Blitzen 17 years ago

"wow the gramatical and spelling errors in this thread are some of the worst i've ever seen........."

Blame the number of non-English-speaking contributors.

But if you can get past the errors, what are your thoughts on the Spanish Empire?

reply

[–] WSS4ever 17 years ago

"wow the gramatical and spelling errors in this thread are some of the worst i've ever seen........."

'Blame the number of non-English-speaking contributors."

I'm a non-English-speaking contributor, and I would like to read what you can write in a non mother tongue language about this matter (or any other).

Being a speaker of 4 different languages, working in two no mother tongue languages (oh yes, one of them English) I have no problem in saying that my English is much better than many English-born speakers.

Next time, leave the personal attacks off the board. There's no need of making fun at other people's efforts. Again, please us with the joy of reading you in other language than your own mother tongue.

The air is humming, and something great is coming...

reply

[–] LadyAnne608 17 years ago

i believe they said that Spain was the world's most powerful empire because of the control it had over the americas and was starting to be a dominating country on the New World, while other countries (England, France...) tried to seize some of the New World for themselves, but were no match for the might and control of Spain. my suggestion for watching movies like this would be not to take things like this too literally.

Grumble all you like, this is how it's going to be -Anne Boleyn

reply

[–] msrafam2 16 years ago

Very relevant to the subject at hand - and get your punctuation up to scratch in your own language before complaining about other people's English. I'd like to see you write in a foreign language ...

reply

[–] tohodaijinisuru-1 16 years ago

Oh for God's sake, guys. It's a MOVIE. You do realize that you're not watching history as it actually unfolded, right? There is no scientific process or mathematical equation that determines which country is the greatest. Europe did owe many technological advances to Asia, yes, and it is also true that they did not work quite as hard as the Europeans to extend their borders beyond their respective land areas at that period in time. Both countries had their merits but there is no way to prove that any country is the greatest. Even if there was, it is still relative to time.

Remember that the opening lines serve to set the scene for the movie. In the setting of the movie, China would not have been viewed by the Europeans as the greatest country, nor does it have any influence on the plot. Spain's role, however, does, and to set up a strong conflict for the protagonist(s) they made a statement that establishes Spain's ominous role in the movie. It would be much less effective to say, "Spain is possibly the greatest country" or "arguably the greatest". For the same reasons, biopics are often subject to embellishments. They are STORIES. Their main purpose is entertainment, not education. If this were a documentary or a film intended for educational purposes, then yes, you could and should argue that the statement of Spain being the greatest country at that time is not objective, but rather subjective, and as such, should either be omitted from the film or posed in a way that offers the statement for consideration, rather than declaring its truth.

It is highly unlikely that you're going to change anyone's opinion on the matter carrying on as you are. If someone has enough faith in their evidence to argue them, they will usually not be swayed by the similar arguing of counter-evidence. I recommend that everyone just agree to disagree, and not take statements from the movie out of their dramatic context and interpret them as historical facts.

reply

[–] TheBigHarv 17 years ago

Thanks, what would we do without tools like you to tell us useless crap that does not matter.

China and you both suck

reply

[–] dundaswest 17 years ago

16 and 17 centuries the Ottoman Empire was still the most powerful state in the world both in wealth and military capability.

reply

[–] acheron33 17 years ago

you dream . ottoman empire had a very small profesional army and for what we know on open field could do little agaisnt more modern european armys .

his artillery was bad for the 16 century and way worse for 17 century. they had massive numbers but the efectivity was poor .

in wealth no other country was more powerfull than spain with the money of america and the trade of the pacific .

what great generals rise on the 16 17 century from ottoman empire and what achieved .

What tactics they improved than where superior to the combined army doctrine of the europeans .

And yes they rebuild his navy after lepanto but with what sailors the best ones where killed scaping just 2 great captain the best crew was killed or taken as prisioners.

What happened on malta viena .

the spanish defeated the dreaded jannisaries .

reply

[–] dundaswest 17 years ago

. "ottoman empire had a very small profesional army and for what we know on open field could do little against more modern european armys"

ok so maybe you can explain why the European empires(specially powerful ones) never attempted the get the Jerusalem (for 500 hundred years) which was the most important city for christian world

so maybe you can also explain why "so powerful Spain" went west by sea and found new lands instead beat the Ottomans get the The economically important Silk Road and Spice (Eastern) trade routes.

so what was the reason in the first place to force the great explorer Vasco da Gama and other famous sailors to discover new lands

i 'll tell you why cuz they knew that they had zero chance against the ottomans in ground battles specially in their own territory.

"in wealth no other country was more powerful than Spain with the money of america and the trade of the pacific ."

how can you underestimate wealth of the Egypt, Greece , Iraq , Jerusalem all the Muslim and Arabic world , north Africa ,Balkans, trade routes(silk and spice) part of the Russia control of the black sea, Mediterranean see and the taxes from 29 providence and so on...

ottomans had all that wealth but they never used cultural and religious assimilation as a part of the government policy like other empires did in that time period that was the reason all these countries still have their own identity. they don't speak Turkish at all and they are not all Muslim. ottomans never attempted use their wealth as a main economical source for the empire itself like Spain did(ottomans economical policy was based on taxes not the despoliation)

'what great generals rise on the 16 17 century from ottoman empire and what achieved .
What tactics they improved than where superior to the combined army doctrine of the europeans "

as i explained b4 they had the enough power to span 3 Continents and had the 29 providence in 16 and 17 century i believe that was way difficult than beat native Americans who only use arrows and lances.
for the generals pls search for Selim I,Suleiman the Magnificent,Barbarossa Hayreddin Pasha,Selim II,Sokullu Mehmet Pasha.

"What happened on malta viena .
the spanish defeated the dreaded jannisaries"

in malta ,it was the coalition of Catholic powers called holly league beat the ottomans ((not just Spain)and Vienna ,again, Christian world was protecting the city and it was ottomans try to conquer the Vienna and it was not a open field battle but a siege(imagine you march your army for thousand of miles away from your homeland with lack of food and ammunition plus winter conditions and sickness)

i would say 15 and 16 century belong to ottomans and they started lose power after the beginning of the 17 century

sorry for the long post

reply

[–] acheron33 17 years ago

on the time we are talking the reason was simple. europe was on turmoil of wars than will last almost till 1800.

the great powers of europe been on loads of wars by religion or agresion . the threath of the ottoman empire was small one if u think than an european army is going to invade you.

on the 15 and 16 century the only power thans till looking to take over jerusalem was the kingdowm of spain but being on 67 battlefronts at same time means opening a new front was stupid .

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why ? no one expect it worked and it was not taken seriusly till much later when the gold and silver the sugar and many other products began to flow sevilla .

if wasnt tfor the italian wars be for sure than ferdinand would had jumped over the turks .

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
no one forced vasco de gama to anything . he present himself with a idea to get another route to avoid the portuguese colonys . since the portugal king did not care nothing about vasco he went to spain and like colombus it worked .

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

you are wrong the route of spices was on pure decandence the ships of the portuguese show us than they could carry bigger number of products than the land routes of the ottoman empire .

A early portuguese ship of the age would carry 300 tons and later the spanish would make ships able to take upon 700 to 800 tons . ad fleets of 30 and 40 ships and u had a deal .
the only power than still need of the ottoman route where the italian citys wich dont have power to force the portuguese or the spanish to do nothing

so they still need such routes to remain a economic pwoer but the develop of the sea trader with massive fleets carring sheer amounts of materials than the land routes just could dream .....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the only reason to atatck the ottoman was religius but the struggles on europe due to the reform ended the imperial dream of charles v to make european union and take the ottoman empire.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

we can if we look at the sheer numbers of silver and gold than each on the indian fleet and later the paicific fleet .
we talking about 1000 tons of gold each eyar and near 16.000 of silver .

the silk and species begins to been seen on america . and we still had the wool trade of europe . silk was a luxury wool was a first need. and with a bigger rate of posible buyers.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

those people where conquered by just and simple adventurers not by the spanisha rmy regulars the spanish armyw as not involved on the conquest of america.

and its easy to say when they outnumber you 10.000> 1.

The spanish had and european empire figthing agaisnt almost all the countrys of europe on his own atatcked fron sea and land from north south east and west. we lasted as world empire 150 years. standing the ground agaisnt everyone .

if the turks where so great why they just dont try to attack spain but instead they support the economy of the dutchs the english or the frenchs ?

because fear than if spain wins the europeans wars the next step will be turkey.

>>>>

you name quite small numbers of generals. and most of them end losing .ferando gonzaled de cordoba the great captain (who beat the turks on cephalonia), colonna . lannoy ,frundsberg,verdugo,leyva ,fernando di avalos ,juan de aguila ,the duke of alba , bazan (the real man than make lepanto been a victory and who saved doria ass). don john of austria . the duke of parma , sancho davila , spinola, julian romero...... i could keep going .

>>>>>>>>>

again wrong . malta would had been taken without the aid of just spain . was philip 2 the only man who care to send troops to help the kingths.

the duke of alba raise and army and put on command to garcia of toledo with 9600. spanish soldiers of the italians garrisons . this force was just amde of spaniards since they where they only profesional soldiers ready to attack fast and remove the sisge .

11 of september the field marshal sande engange on battle agaisnt the turks, the turks though than a a small force was not a problem.

Error the spanish destroyed the turks lines and advance took their own artillery and used it agaisnt his own troops. the 12 of september the turk fleet was gone being harrased by 35 galleys of the spanish fleet under the command of bazan.

the main source of loss for the turks where his elite corps the jaannisaries and the

the turk counter atatck on hungary was a disaster and end with more deaths and the turk army on ruins .

you are so much wrong about the catholic league was for lepanto not malta . and the proof is the statue of philip 2 on malta fortres with the legend . the only true king than help the cristians of malta on his darkest hour.

for vienna was charles v who organized the defense of vienna putting seasoned troops to defend it mostly veterans of the italians wars .

and was charles who sued the money of spain to raise the counter atatck force of 150.000 soldiers and to buy the temporal peace to make a united front .

the frenchs where allied of the turks and there where frenchs engineers on the sisge figthing agaisnt the catholics , 32 where taken and his fate is so horrible than i dont have forces to write what kind of torture was given to jean micheal and company .

this was not new for the spanish armys . think what type of army keeps figthing when you have been unpaid for 2 years and theys till figthing .

The spanish where a superior logistic because they craft the spanish road to suply mens and weapons to his figths something the turks didnt .

if you think the siege of vienna was hard think again how hard was to figth on winter on flanders and agaisnt modern fortress on sieges than took around 5 years .

reply

[–] o25d 16 years ago

The Spanish army was never a match against the Ottoman army. For 200 years (1498-1683) the Ottomans where invincible. Unlike the Spanish who fought indians who had bows and arrows the Ottomans fought real enemies. The Spanish only fought the Ottomans when they were allied with almost all of Europe. The Ottomans fought and defeated the most powerful nations in Europe, like the Hapsburg (Germans), Poles, Hungarians, Serbs, Italians and many more in the middle east. Spain's power waned after 1650 while the Ottomans where still a military might well into the early 19th century.

reply

[–] adeherrpal 16 years ago

The spanish army in the XVI century was the most powerful army in Europe. They fighted against France, Duch Provinces, Germans protestants, English during the XVI century and part of the XVII century. They took Paris a couple of times and invaded Germany and Italy, sacked Rome, etc ...

"The Ottomans fought and defeated the most powerful nations in Europe"

They only defeated minor states in eastern europe, the only big state they defeated was Hungary, they tried to take Vienna but they were defeated.

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 16 years ago

Or was it that even then it was typical scanrio of warfare in Balkans. That meaning ruthless behind lines raids to destroy supply and reserves done by locals. It took combined effort of whole Europe to stop Ottomans at Vienna. If Vienna would have fallen there is pretty good chance that so would have rest of Europe.

reply

[–] Mil-Jor 17 years ago

Big caption at the beginning of this movie says: Spain was the most powerful empire in the WORLD. This is too much. Hollywood could have just said "the most powerful empire in Europe." That alone is enough to emphasize late 16th century Spanish power and is historically accurate.

You're comparing oranges and apples here.

Did China crush other big empires overseas and establish colonies? No - for various reasons which I'm sure you know and which we don't have to go into here. China isolated itself and never "tested" itself against other contemporary empires. Personally I think you might very well be right. If China had actually colonized the Americas before the Europeans did, we might all be speaking Chinese today - but the truth is, we will never know...

reply

[–] acheron33 17 years ago

one event not very well know for people ineterested on the debate spanish vs chinese.

The spanish where welcomed at chinese court and even allys of the chinese .

why you would ask .because the spanish fougth agaisnt the infamous pirate lima hong who outnumbered them ten to one .

This link for wiki is a trash and very innacurate but me english suxx and this is the only thing than i could snatch with proper english

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limahong

if wana know a more detailed account of the battle i can provide it with more names , acts , and events.

reply

[–] LusitanWanderer 16 years ago

I personally believe this movie portrays a very distinct reality but the power of Philips II, III and IV, Kings of Spain and Portugal (I, II and III in this country) is not one of them. When the Iberian Union occured, the Kingdom became the most influential (can we say powerful? perhaps...) in the world. They were most certainly well received in Asia (a land of great empires as well but not interested in expanding their domains outside mainland Asia).

I think one of the things that could've been sharpened in this movie was the spanish-speaking characters fluency on the language but ok it's not that important.

To clarify one thing: Portugal had the first global empire but it was not as wide and powerful as the spanish, who closely followed them, and later, the british.

PS: forgive me for my bad english and please do not insult because of my lack of knowledge of a foreign language as it was done to the other member.

Regards.

youngsters dont make mistakes, they try new things n besides, brains r overrated!

reply

[–] falacta 16 years ago

Something usually forgotten in such comparisons is simply that the geographic location of kingdoms and empires dictated their doctrines and policies.

China was simply so large that it was suffering from its own weight. Internal divisions, droughts and other catastrophes kept its imperial apparatus busy so outward thinking was a luxuary it could not afford.

In comparison Portugal and Spain started out compact and thanks to the recent Reconquista extremely energetic in putting its now free ressources to good use. The only land border was reasonably secure. Thanks to lucky circumstance they quickly found new lands free for the taking.

Similarily France always had to divert attention from colonizing the new world to its imminent home interests in the Netherlands, along the German border, in Italy and against Spain so while it boasted a bigger populace and army than England it could never invest as much energy in a naval force or colonies. They still got large areas of land which should speak for itself for the prowress of that nation at the time but they really couldn't colonize it the same way as England because of home commitments and didn't find an as big native population as Spain so these colonies were never of as great importance to them.

The list goes on. Today the USA claims ultimate supremacy for having global projection power and aircraft carriers but if you look at Russia and before that
the Soviet Union it is simple to see why they are not so stupid to invest as much in such toys when their country borders to several dozen other countries and they have home territory close to nearly any area of interest to them (and in turn would need about four seperate fleets in completely sealed of theatres of naval war). I sometimes get the impression the Americans are surprised/annoyed how often Russia is a closeby neighbor to a crisis point they have to ship over with carriers (Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran,...)

Alot of developments are kind of predictable if you look at it that way.

It's not like other countries were stupid or weak and thus did not do this or that. It's simply that they had a very different set of priorities or faced certain challenges others did not.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JMongrel71 16 years ago

China had the largest population at the time, and arguably was still the most technically advanced country (although Europe would soon pass it in short order if they hadn't already). But China as always, was inward-looking, particularly under the Ming. The Ming banned all overseas exploration, thus allowing countries like Spain and Portugal to dominate the rest of the world. And if you define how powerful a country is by the amount of territory it rules and the portion of the globe that it influences, than Spain at the time was by far the most powerful Empire.

Another candidate for World's Most Powerful Empire at the time I haven't seen mentioned yet was the Ottoman Empire. In 1585, they controlled all of Southeastern Europe, Turkey, Egypt, part of Persia, and nearly all of the Middle East. They were the scourge of the Mediterranean, often raiding Spain and Italy and threatening shipping everywhere. Their leader, Sultan Suleiman, was one of the most capable rulers of the time.

reply

[–] JankaJaakari 16 years ago

There have been fair share of talk over matter of Ottomans all ready. just read earlier postings.

reply

[–] acheron33 16 years ago

The ottomans did not raided spain . pirates under his protection did .
Toe with toe spain would beat the ottomans .
Without the european warfare and religions wars than weakened and finnaly lead to the fall of spain ottoman empire have no chance.

1: siege of malta : defeat thanks to spanish reinforcements and the spanish garrison inside of the island (most of the knigths where spanish italians bunch french and germans).

2: first siege of vienna . seems everyone choose to ignore the 100.000 mens army raised and payed by charles V coming to broke the siege with atleats 35.000 very seasoned veterans from spanish french wars. infact the commander of vienna was a seasoned general than fougth for spain on the italians wars.

3: battle of lepanto. despite of venecians claiming all the glory at the end was spain who pay the whole expedition the pope refused to pay for a service than every cristians should have done free... and was a spanish admiral who can claim the victory was thanks to him when andrea doria forces colapsed.

4: the largest galley war. over 160 years of galley warfare and not counting battles such lepanto the spanish lost 89 galleys and 12000. soldiers. the ottomans lost 321 galleys, over 120.000 free slaves from theirs galleys and about 13.000 janissaries and about 300.000 deads or enslaved (the turks soldiers where often traded , renegades handed to inquisition, and common soldiers from north africa enslaved or executed).By 1670 ottoman empire sea power was :0

Big proof of this where over 169 flags and over 7000 pieces handed to turks on 2005 by the spanish president . this was not very well liked specially after the poped handed back the flags of lepanto.

reply

[–] edjavega 16 years ago

In 1585, China did not have any "overseas colonies" the way historians would define it.

It was ships from Spain (and other European countries) which were sailing around the world, forming colonies in places like the Americas, Asia and Oceania, and parts of Africa. Not China. China may have had a bigger population than Europe, or a stronger military, but their direct influence was not being spread or felt (other than on the trade area) outside their actual sphere of control.

That is why Spain was depicted in this movie as the greatest empire in the world at that time.

This is also the director's sneaky way to "scare" pro-English (or Protestant) movie audiences, like some "subliminal" suggestion, telling them that at the start of the story, Spain was so powerful and might actually have taken over England if not for Elizabeth, and that England started to take Spain's place as the world's mightiest colonial empire after Elizabeth became Queen.

reply