21st century - Century of China 20th century - Century of USA

>>2303924
>17th century - Century of Spain
wat

>>2303929
Shit no fuck i fucked it up

well fuck me

century of Germany when?

File: charlesIIspain.jpg (36KB, 636x358px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 636x358px

>16th century - Century of Habsbourgs
>17th century - Century of Spain
abloooblloobllluurrffpt

>>2303924
16th century was the ottoman century.

>>2303924
>century of france
They got btfo during the entire latter half

To the point where they imploded, beheaded their monarch and nobility, and created a state that's batshit even by our modern sensibilities, with innocent civilians and clergy being mass executed

Their accomplishment being they didn't totally fragment or get partitioned

13th and 14th century is Mongol?

>>2303977
Monarchist detected

>>2303980
le mongols xd +1

>>2303924
>21st - Century of China
meme

The 17th Century was the Dutch century. Spain was in decline already. The British got so arseblasted by the Dutch successes that they allied with FRANCE AND SPAIN to destroy them.

21st century - Century of China
20th century - Century of USA
19th century - Century of Britain
18th century - Century of Europe
17th century - Century of Evangelism
16th century - Century of Habsbourgs
15th century - Century of Italy
14th century - ???
13th century - Century of Mongols

>>2304068
>ethnic group, countries, continent, idea all on the same list
uh?

>>2304068
>Century of Evangelism

>>2303986
He's completely right and you're blasé calling him a monarchist thinking that's in any way an insult. Retard.

>>2303960
this desu senpai

File: helloperator9_1371803143.png (26KB, 634x580px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 634x580px

>anyone but China/India relevant till 18th century

>>2304105
>GDP in a time with virtually no exchanges where wealth was not used in a productive way
wow man you sure showed those europeans

>>2304018
>was the Dutch century
t.Williem Van Bommel
The Dutch were never a dominant power

>>2304105
>GDP before globalism and industrial warfare
>Any relevance
Even Portugal was a bigger power than China in the XV century

>>2304105
>implying
china's growth is already slowing down and India's growth is even more unsustainable.

>>2304111
>Establish the biggest monopoly the world has ever seen
>Spain, France and England declare war, but never manage to destroy the country
>Fuck up the Anglo fleet by sailing up their most important river without any resistance
>Replace their king by a Dutch prince
>Finalize Spain's decline

>>2304127
17th century was the Mughals' century unless we're only counting countries that still exist.

>>2303924
>21st century - Century of China
fuck off, liu kang

>>2304127
Fucking cuckold never produced an heir though

>tfw the house of orange-nassau could've been sitting on the English throne for centuries to come

>>2304134
17th century was the Mughals' century when you count territorial expansion

>>2304127
>>Spain, France and England declare war, but never manage to destroy the country
Spain was slapping their dick on the Dutch until the French intervened.And then France in a couple of years destroyed all the Dutch influence
>>Fuck up the Anglo fleet by sailing up their most important river without any resistance
Still not their century
>>Replace their king by a Dutch prince
>>Finalize Spain's decline
The Dutch barely won any battle against Spain.Appart from Downs you can't claim that they finalized Spain's decline specially when they were about to get rolled if France hadn't intervened after Nördlingen

>>2304105
>talking about gdp
>not per capita

>>2304113
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tunmen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Xicaowan

>>2304170
Yeah some skirmishes of a miniscule Portuguese fleet in the other side of the world against a huge Chinese fleet on their waters.Are you serious or just a butthurt chink canadian?

>>2303924
>>century of china
Not really likely.

>>2304189
Colonial naval powers were mainly few troops/ships conquests against native naked barbarians with spears.

It wasn't until the industrial era edge did they become powerful enough to push the Qingz and that was after the Qingz had been decadent after the widespread Opium epidemic problems of Qingz.

The statement "Portugal was a bigger power than China in XV century" bears no merit. Portugese didn't even have a standing army till late 16th century totaling no more than 8,000.

10th century: Century of the Eastern Roman Empire

File: 1446460457217.jpg (718KB, 1692x2004px) Image search: [Google]

718KB, 1692x2004px

>>2303977
Dunno m8
Pic related seems pretty impressive to me
More than anything Britain ever accomplished at least

>>2304127
>Replace their king by a Dutch prince
t-t-that was voluntarily, i swear. It was a revolution

>>2304287
they had Denmark on their side, its not really that impressive.

>>2303924
>19th century - Century of Britain
>18th century - Century of France
>17th century - Century of Spain
>16th century - Century of Habsbourgs
>15th century - Century of Italy
Shit opinions. Those entities exited in eras where powers equal & greater than them existed.

USA is the only correct one. And is only true since the 90s.

>>2304304
Not to mention Mysore

>>2304287
>DUDE, KILLING OFF ALL OUR ELITE, RICH, RULERS AND MONARCHS LMAO
>DUDE, BECOMING REPUBLIC RUN BY CRONY WEASELS WHO USED TO SUCK THE KING'S COCK, LMAO
Tyranny of populism

>>2303924
1350-1790 - The Chinese Centuries

>>2303924
>Posting a picture of České Budějovice
Btw i'm going there this month

21st century - Century of China
20th century - Century of USA
19th century - Century of Britain
18th century - Century of France
17th century - Century of Habsburgs
16th century - Century of France
15th century - Century of France

>>2304255
11th century: Century of the Normans
12th century: Century of the Crusaders

What's with the Europoors and their WE WUZ shit?

Face it, Europe was irrelevant before 15th century. The highlights are 15th century onward and 4th century backwards.

In between those are the Islamic Golden age and multiple Chinese Golden age.

>>2304657
>16th century - Century of France
>15th century - Century of France
*Loses Italian war*
*Goes bankrupt*
*Loses another Italian war*
*Loses against the English*
*King gets captured*
*Allies with the Ottomans*
*Allies with the protestants*
*Loses Italian war*
Wow those centuries must have certainly being pathetic if France was the dominant power.
Now fixing your shit list
>16th century - Century of Castille
>15th century - Century of Castille

>>2304068
>12th century: Century of the Crusaders
no
12th Century: Century of the HRE
11th Century: Century of the Byzantines
10th Century: Century of the Cordoba Caliphate
9th Century: Century of the Vikings

>>2304706
>Century of the Cordoba Caliphate
They were weak as fuck.

>>2304693
>*Loses against the English*

Only one that's wrong in your list
France was pretty bad in that era, but they still won all their wars against the English

>>2304713
>but they still won all their wars against the English
Didn't Henry cucked Francis out Of Calais?

>>2304709
they were economically and culturally powerful though. if were talking military i guess hre or byzantines

>>2303924
What is this

>>2304736
On the contrary
England had been allowed to retain Calais in the treaty ending the HYW, but they lost it soon after

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Calais_(1558)

>>2304738
>they were economically and culturally powerful
Yeah but certainly not economically and culturally more powerfull than Byzantium or the Abasies

>>2304706
>byzantines
Manzikert happened

>>2304751
I meant the battle of the spurs though

>>2304759
till the 1060s tho they were ok

>>2303960
L E P A N T O
E
P
A
N
T
O

>>2304068
>16th century - Century of Habsbourgs
Change for Spain, and we are good.

>>2304018
>>2304111
>>2304127
>>2304142
The first half was still the spanish golden age, i will give you that the second half of the 17th everything went to shit.

>tfw Westerners think China wants to be like the US

We just want to unify China and be at peace without foreigners trying to invade us. Is that too much to ask? America always tries to get the angry yapping Jap and Taiwan dogs to get at us. No more!

>>2304759
When did Alexios show up? 1100's?

>>2304018

Spain didn't ally with France and/or England vs the Dutch one single time.

It was either neutral or with the Dutch, depending on the specific war.

>>2303924
>no Mongols
>no Ottomans
>no Portugal

>>2305611
>no Portugal
>Portugal ever ever being an hegemon.
>When their standing army was smaller than the army of some Castillian nobles
t. Alberto Barbosa

>>2305682
They controlled the entire Indian Ocean.

>>2305685
That doesn't make them an hegemon when the duke of Cadiz almost conquered all the south of Portugal by himself

File: Gt+superpower+ok+then+india+whatever+you+say+_d90949fd69269053dee97b3ce003fc0a.png (1MB, 1414x855px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1414x855px

>>2303924
>21st century - Century of China
>Not India

>>2303951
5th, 6th century

>>2305611
I must agree with you about the Ottomans. Few centuries they were only super power in Europe

>>2304688
You're an idiot.

File: asia-news-report-china-june-17-2011.jpg (331KB, 1008x1008px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1008x1008px

>China
>ruling anything

>>2303924
>15th century - Century of Italy
Pffft, they were a bunch of city-states. Replace them with Ottomans and it'd be a better list.

>>2305832
>what is cultural relevance

ottomans were literally the superpower in late 15th century and early 16th century.

the france-ottoman alliance was the NATO of their time

>>2303924
>China
Nice meme

21th century - China
20th century - USA
19th century - Britain
18th century - France
17th century - Sweden
16th century - Portugal/Spain
15th century - Ottomans
13th and 14th centuries - Mongols
12th century - Crusaders
11th century - Normans
10th century - Byzantines
9th century - Franks and Vikings
7th and 8th centuries - Arabs
6th century - Byzantines
5th century - Huns
1st to 4th centuries - Rome

>>2306020
>17th century - Sweden
t.Sven

>>2306020
>sweden
This delusion

>>2306020
>>2306060
>>2306740
17th century = Spain for the first half and France for the second half

File: 1427748504384.jpg (9KB, 240x196px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 240x196px

>people trying to call the 21st century not even a quarter of a way through it

>>2305820

that's awesome, fuck off moralfag

>>2305778
Is this ironic

>>2307496
ow, the edge

>>2304094
Lmfao when a monarchist gets butthurt over freedom of speech

Get guillotiné, fuckboi

>21st century - Century of USA
>20th century - Century of USA
>19th century - Century of Britain
>18th century - Century of France
>17th century - Century of Spain
>16th century - Century of Habsbourgs
>15th century - Century of Italy

FTFY, bud

>17th century - Century of Spain

It was still Spain in the beginning, but then it was France. The turning point is generally considered to be the battle of Rocroi in 1643.

File: lmgtfy.png (87KB, 697x641px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 697x641px

>>2304741

>21st century: The century of the Multicontinental arabic caliphate
Or
>21st century: Century of worldwide civil wars

File: ixSdAMb.gif (11KB, 501x504px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 501x504px

21st century - Century of Jews

>>2303924
what is this based off? rising powers? in that case, Spain should be 16th, France 15th, and Dutch 17th

21st century - Century of USA (and Britain)
20th century - Century of USA (and Britain, no mostly Britain, really. you know what never mind, the century of Britain)
19th century - Century of Britain
18th century - Century of Britain
17th century - Century of Britain
16th century - Century of the feudal states in Britain
15th century - Century of the feudal states īn Britain

>>2310413
>17th century - Century of Britain
wrong. absolutely wrong.
answer, like the other guy said before, was officially Spain in the beginning and France at the end. But in reality France was the only country to "win" the thirty years' war. Richelieu's war effort was well funded and well fought. On the other hand, it became increasingly clear in the first decade of the 17th century that Spain was bankrupted. iirc it defaulted one or two times in this span of time alone. Perhaps, though, we can call the early half of the century the period of Dutch mercantile and naval supremacy which only got displaced by the anglo-dutch war of the 1550s and Louis XIV's near-successful invasion on the Netherlands in 1660 or so. Britain did not become a power until the 9 years' war in the 1690s, when the Glorious Revolution (i.e. ascension of a Dutch king to the throne) forced it to participate in European affairs seriously for the first time in nearly a century. As for the 18th century, for all those who say its was the French century are wrong. It's fair to say that Britain and France shared the century duking it out on the continent and around the world. France (though this has been contested by some) was the cultural center of Europe. But people looked even more admiringly at the productiveness of the anglos, their prosperous agricultural and mercantile pursuits, their seeming lack of rigid social hierarchy and stable constitutional monarchy. Britain was the one that withstood the huge financial burdens of 18th century warfare. France, as one poster here already explained, couldn't; France's imminent fiscal insolvency in the 1780s was probably the powder keg that exploded into the French Revolution. Britain financed its wars more effectively with a better tax system paid into by willing subjects (though there was plenty of grumbling about it) and with superior financial institutions and therefore leading to way lower interest on its debt than the continental powers.

>>2310514
woops meant for this guy
>>2310418

>>2306020
China is over due for a massive civil war.

>>2310546
The US is more likely to have one

>>2310546
>there will never be second taiping uprising where someone claims to be hong xiuquan and jesus' brother and the han must overthrow godless western educated barbarians

5th century - Century of France (obvious)
6th century - Century of France (obvious)
7th century - Century of France (obvious)
8th century - Century of France (obvious)
9th century - Century of France (Charlemagne, obvious)
10th century - Century of France (Cluny and feudalism)
11th century - Century of France (Norman Conquest and Crusades)
12th century - Century of France (Gothic)
13th century - Century of France (obvious)
14th century - Century of France (obvious)
15th century - Century of France (Joan of Arc to Italian Wars)
16th century - Century of France (crushing Habsburgs and making Renaissance less shit)
17th century - Century of France (obvious)
18th century - Century of France (obvious)
19th century - Century of France (Napoleon to Belle Epoque)
20th century - Century of France (Postmodernism)
21th century - Century of France (France will rise again)

in my fair and balanced opinion.

>>2310636
>there will never be

Hmm

>>2306020
>12th century - Crusaders

>only successful crusade was in 1097, all the others (in the 12th century) were complete failures

jesus dude

11th century it's normans and turks

>>2311544
>only successful crusade was in 1097, all the others (in the 12th century) were complete failures
Wrong. Stop lying.

>>2310614
How?

>>2310514
>It's fair to say that Britain and France shared the century
t.John Smith

>>2305572
>what is Chinese expansionism in the South China Sea

>>2311561
t. Pierre

>>2311534
>16th century - Century of France
>crushing Habsburgs
When?

>>2311534
Omg so true, but well in the hundred years war, we was close to lost aigainst those fkg britishs so not so obvious

>>2311584
>aigainst those fkg britishs so not so obvious
t. John Reginald Blacksmisth

>>2311555
Please explain what was so successful about the Crusades after the first. Do go on, I'm interested to see how you spin objective military disasters into success.

>>2311580
>>2311584
OK to be completely honest, the 15th and 16th centuries may be better described as the centuries of shit. Although France did win the Hundred Years War and manage to contain Habsburg quest for world domination.

>>2311603
The first three were objectively successful.

>>2303951
6th Century.

>>2303960
Correct.

>>2303980
No, the Mongols were a natural disaster

>>2304137
Why're you in denial

>>2305611
The Mongol governments around the world were shaped by existing local structures

>>2310546
>civil war in 2017 China

>People actually believe this

>>2303924
22nd century - Century of India


Prove me wrong.

>>2311555
>second crusade
Lasted 4 days (!!!) the time of seeing the walls of Damascus and retreat

successful???????

And you tell me ''stop lying''? Go read a history book. Any.
>Third crusade
-Barbarossa drowns, Germans withdraw
-Philippe Augustus throws a fit, French withdraw
-Richard Lionhearted recaptures the coast, less than 1/10 of the original territory of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, Jerusalem itself is not recaptured.

This one is partially successful at best, the main goal wasn't achieved at all.

>>2311679
Meant for
>>2311544

>>2311629
>second crusade
>a success
>crusader armies half dead before they even reach the Holy Land thanks to betrayals and raids by Seljuks
>fail to accomplish anything at all in the Holy Land
>get asses soundly kicked and forced to run away, leaving Jerusalem to the mercy of Muslims
>but hey we managed to force a single Moorish city to surrender in Iberia!
>chalk that up as a win for Christendom!

I will give you the Third Crusade as a technical victory, even if it failed to achieve its main goal the Crusaders at least came out ahead at the end of the day.

But honestly, trying to pass off the second crusade as a victory is ridiculous. Literally no historian agrees with you.

>>2311679
1st succesful
2nd kind of a fail
3rd success
4th success
5th fail
6th success
7th fail
8 nothing happened
9th success

>>2311617
>and manage to contain Habsburg quest for world domination.
They managed shit. Habsburgs didn't start a single war against France and France just won the league of Cambrai that was a meme in itself

>>2311713
>4th success
Okay now I know you're trolling.

>>2303924
22nd century - Century of USA
21st century - Century of USA
20th century - Century of USA
19th century - Century of USA
18th century - Century of USA

Much better.

>>2311727
>The creation of the Latin empire is somehow not a crusaders victory.
I said no lies bitch. The sixth was won without a single battle. The ninth achieved its objectoves and the first anf thrid were extremelly succesful

>>2304068
Who would have won the 14th century had the black death not occured? England had a good run in France with the early phases of the 100 years war, but personally I think the crown goes to the Ottomans who appeared in that time period.

The papacy was probably the biggest loser overall, at least in Europe.

>>2311731
>sacks the greatest Christian city in the world instead of retaking Jerusalem like they were supposed to
>success
You are a massive retard. Also calling the ninth a success when it was what ultimately killed Crusading forever is hilarious.

>>2311798
>>sacks the greatest Christian city in the world
They never sacked Rome. The ninth crusade relieved the siege of Tripoli,sunk the Mameluk fleet and achieved a ten year peace that was the objective of the crusade to begin with

>>2310546
Wont be for another couple of decades at least.

US will have a civil war before China.

>>2303924
>21st century - Century of China
2 yuan have been added to your account

>>2311713
>2nd kind of a fail
Once again, how exactly is 4 days of military campaign, the army melting away in front of the walls of Damascus and effectively resulting in Nuraddin taking the city, thus the strengthening of the crusaders biggest enemy just ''kind of''.

At least you changed from ''success'' to ''kind of a fail''.
Sorry to burst your bubble, it was a total failure and a joke of military campaign for the annals.

Not worthy discussing this further, you clearly know very little and are heavily biased, confirmed by scrolling down the list.
Either trolling or retarded.

>>2311820
Constantinople in 1200 was far bigger and richer than Rome and had been for centuries.

>>2312546
>1200 was far bigger
Yes
> and richer than Rome
Nope

>>2303924
Century of Brazil when

>>2305572
t. not actually Chinese

>>2312757
Brazil is the heir to the roman empire so soon

>>2312561
By 500 AD Rome had been sacked twice, Constantinople not only resisted sacking until the 4th Crusade but was also a trade center on the line from China to Eastern Europe.

It was not just far richer than Rome, but likely the richest of the planet with only Baghdad at its peak effectively. It's actually one of the reasons Crusaders resented Byzantines, envy of their wealth.

>>2306020

>21th century - European Empire
>20th century - USA
>19th century - Britain
>18th century - France
>17th century - Spain/France
>16th century - Spain
>15th century - Ottomans
>13th and 14th centuries - Mongols
>12th century - Holy Roman Empire
>11th century - The Pope
>10th century - Byzantine Empire
>9th century - Franks and Vikings
>7th and 8th centuries - Arabs
>6th century - Byzantines
>5th century - Visigoths
>1st to 4th centuries - Rome

Fixed for you

>>2312940
By the time of the second crusade Byzantium was a clusterfuck and Constantinaple the heart of a husk.Rome collected wealth from all of western Europe.

>>2304113
Eurocentrist meme

Europe was a shithole untill we got busy with the new world. We had nothing to offer to China untill we brought back silver from the new world. Chinese manufacturing and state bodies were miles ahead of a fragmented decentralized Europe.

>this lack of acknowledgement for the first state ever in the history of mankind to achieve global domination

you amateurs probably dont even know who it is

century of Sudacaland when

>>2313483
>Europe was a shithole untill we got busy with the new world
Yeah whatever.Europe was alredy more technologically advanced than China in the XIV century way before the Portuguese explored Africa
>>2313505
>this lack of acknowledgement for the first state ever in the history of mankind to achieve global domination
Persia?Da joos?

>>2313523
>chinese govermental apparatus is several magnitudes more advanced than any state in europe
>metallurgy technologies like the blast furnace that are used for thousands of years in china are only starting to be introduced in europe in the late 14th century
>chinese agricultural techniques are still vastly superior to europeans by the 17th century

The ming didn't want anything to do with european goods since they concluded that their own production was big enough and produced superior goods. The europeans gladly paid them with new world silver for chinese goods.

You might want to brush up on your world history because it's widely accepted in the academic world that Chinese were still vastly more advanced than the Europeans till maybe the 16-17th century with the rise of the gunpowder empires.

>>2313630
>You might want to brush up on your world history because it's widely accepted in the academic world that Chinese were still vastly more advanced than the Europeans till maybe the 16-17th century with the rise of the gunpowder empires.
That is why Japan with Portuguese old technology was able to crush through Korea and China? China barely knew how to work steel,their mathematics were behind,in terms of ship building and astronomy they were far behind,they were behind in terms of architecture and engenieering and they were barely advancing in any field at all.

>>2313517
>century of Sudacaland when
>Indios tiraflechas
>Ever doing anything right
Keep waiting

>>2313645
back to work Manolo

oh wait

>>2313675
>The combined GDP of Argentina,CHile,Perú,Bolivia and PAraguay is smaller than the GDP of Spain
Wow I am so impressed Steven Richard Delgado el indio tiraflechas que pesa 200 kilos y mide 1.50m

>>2313345
If you actually read about medieval rome youd see this is false. Rome was a notoriously rundown city in those times. Ever wonder why the rebaissance popes started did a hige rennovation of the city?

>>2313689
>Rome was a notoriously rundown city in those times
Still they recieved a good chunk of all the wealth of Europe and the sons of the most important noble lived there.Rome was vastly more important,wealthy and powerful that Constantinaple at the time.

>>2313641
>europe was more advanced during the 14th century!
>no it wasnt
>dude this 16th century technology shat all over the chinese!!

I'm not even going to argue with randomly naming fields of technology and proclaiming the europeans were better. Your historic """""""""""knowledge""""""""""" is outdated and proven factually wrong by actual historians.

>>2313335
This is ok

>>2313769
>I'm not even going to argue with randomly naming fields of technology and proclaiming the europeans were better. Your historic """""""""""knowledge""""""""""" is outdated and proven factually wrong by actual historians.
No it is not.Just comparing European architecture of the XIV century with CHinese one should give you an idea of the huge gap. Chinese barely knew how to work steel and didn't advanced much since the mongol invasion

Would the 13th century be century of India since everyone wanted to trade with them? Also had the the highest GDP.

>>2313641
>That is why Japan with Portuguese old technology was able to crush through Korea and China
The Japanese lost that war you know this right

>>2315713
>The Japanese lost that war you know this right
Because their navy was obsolete. Even then they were basically undefeted in land battles using Portuguese old technology

>>2315761
>old technology
I mean first all, everything I've seen more or less indicates that their version of the musket was on par or superior with European versions due to their own improvements.

>>2303924
You can talk about centuries being dominated by a single country only from mid 19th to early 20th century onwards, before globalization different states dominated different parts of the world. Globalism pretty much started with British imperialism.

>>2315767
>I've seen more or less indicates that their version of the musket was on par or superior with European versions due to their own improvements.
Based on what? They didn't use muskets they used Archebuses in the late 1570's and archebuses were outdated in Europe alredy. Their only """""improvements""""" were meme bambu shields

>>2315787
Fuck off, chink, you are just envious to the only Asian country which was considered equal by Europeans while your shithole was in a state of constant chaos, disorder and civil war. Even nowadays Japan is the beacon of freedom and democracy in the Pacific region as opposed to your communist totalitarian regime.

21st century - Century of USA
20th century - Century of USA
19th century - Century of USA
18th century - Century of USA
17th century - Century of America
16th century - Century of America
15th century---> 0th century - Century of Jesus (proud sponsor of USA)

>>2315823
>Fuck off, chink, you are just envious to the only Asian country which was considered equal by Europeans while your shithole was in a state of constant chaos, disorder and civil war. Even nowadays Japan is the beacon of freedom and democracy in the Pacific region as opposed to your communist totalitarian regime.
t. Kevin Smith the Otaku weeabo.
Japan had obsolete western technology and it was still enough to overpower their neighbours. Asia was a couple of centuries behimd europe in terms of engenieering

>>2315872
>engenieering

>21st Century: Century of China
Not this meme again

>>2315761
>Because their navy was obsolete.
No,the Japanese tried to apply their feudal system to Korea and failed horribly in the process.

The Japanese were so outstretched that they capitulated the north to the Ming expeditionary force who were vastly outnumbered(35,000~ vs 137,200)

>Even then they were basically undefeted in land battles
If Byeokjegwan and Jiksan are anything to go by the Japanese had significant trouble against Ming cavalry.

Imjin War Koreans are fresh conscripts or guerrillas.

>using Portuguese old technology
Ming used breech loading artillery and arquebuses.

>>2315787
>Their only """""improvements""""" were meme bambu shields
Give credit where credit is due. Japanese came up with the hayago. http://historum.com/asian-history/88853-comparison-ming-mughal-japanese-militaries-1590s.html

>>2315823
>while your shithole was in a state of constant chaos, disorder and civil war.
Sounds like the Sengoku Jidai to me.

>>2305526
>Lepanto
Happened 70% into the century and didn't completely reverse the tide of the geopolitical scale. The massive decline of the Ottomans came well after the 16th century.

>>2315823
>while your shithole was in a state of constant chaos, disorder and civil war
Ming and pre-1820 Qing were hardly 'shitholes'

>>2315823
>There are people on this site who are still memeing about Japan, even though it's been woefully irrelevant up until the late 20th century.

>>2315994
It was relevant in the early 1900s and late 1800s, just not on a global level, let's be fair here

>>2316033
Sorry, I meant to type 19th century not 20th century. You're right. Still, that anyone can act like Japan has ever been the "beacon of Asia" for more than 200 years of the continent's history, is weebing harder than Ken-Sama himself.

>>2316055
Wasn't Ken-sama satire?

>>2316067
Yes, but the point of Ken-Sama is that he's based on an attitude found in reality. I was referencing him symbolically rather than literally.

File: charlesii.jpg (62KB, 509x599px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 509x599px

>>2304342
URRRRRRR
UGUGUGUHUHUHUH

>>2316071
Seems to be historically a thing for some reason though
Like, Rome was a huge greekboo in its heyday despite Greece being worth shit at the time, despite all of Europe being a huge Romaboo after its collapse.
Likewise half of Asia was a huge Chinaboo.

>>2316072
>Putting agreat monarch as an argument against monarchy
Try again

>>2315769
>Globalism pretty much started with British imperialism.
Lol no. It started with the great navigations on the 16th century. Britain only joined late to the party, after getting enough of killing each other in their meme island.

>>2313335
>Visigoths
Just because they invaded and settled on abandoned Roman provinces doesn't mean they were a great power. It's the Hunnic rape train that made the 5th century tremble, influencing the actions of everyone, including the Visigoths.

>The Pope
The Papacy never held great power by itself. It's influence was entirely defined by the willingness of Catholic kings of following it. Furthermore, the Papacy's influence wasn't restricted to the 11th century in particular, and didn't diminish until the Wars of Religion 600 years later. On the other hand, the Normans were undeniably powerful in the 11th century.

>Holy
>Roman
>Empire
Doesn't need explanation. LARPer Empire, nuff said.

>Only Spain
Portugal was as influent as Spain in the 16th century. Spain dominated on Europe and the Americas, Portugal dominated on Africa and Asia.

>European Empire
You wish. Let's see:
>Demographic collapse, wants to solve the problem with immigration, but it doesn't seen to be working out, only making the problem even worse.
>No natural resources, and no colonial empires to get them for free anymore. Has to rely heavily on imports, while the only things Europe has to offer are it's admitedly high quality products and it's human capital.
>Limited power projection, can't force the world to see things their way anymore, due to lack of interest on military affairs.
>Ultimately unsustainable welfare states, with an extremely spoiled population and even more spoiled parasitical immigrants.
>Only a handful of countries are productive, the others are lazy bums or downright shitholes.
>Differences always get in the way when trying to agree on anything. All those centuries being hellbent on slaughtering each other won't be washed away just like that. There's just too much historical and political leverage dragging down attempts at cooperation.

>>2316411
>Portugal was as influent as Spain in the 16th century
t.Alberto Barbosa
Portugal was a tiny merchant empire with an army of 8000 soldiers that was totally irrelevant outside of India and some nigger commercial outputs

>>2316411
> unsustainable welfare states

70 years later, meme economists still claim this. When will you guys grow up and realize that you aren't a real science?

File: EmpireofPhilip2b.jpg (831KB, 1047x896px) Image search: [Google]

831KB, 1047x896px

>>2316411
>Comparing the influence over Europe and America vs Africa and Asia
HAAA!!!! Not even close mate. Btw Spain invaded and annexed Portugal for over 60 years in the 16th century.

>>2304068
>14th century
Century of Tamerlane

>>2303924
>21st century - Century of China
In your dreams

>>2303924
1400-1520 Italy
1520-1550 Ottomans
1550-1648 Spain
1648-1815 France
1815-1915 Britain
1915-2030? USA
2030-? China

>>2316908
Edit:
1648-1672 maybe the Netherlands on a global scale, but in Europe France.
1870-1915 maybe Germany.
And 1939-1942 perhaps Germany as well.

>>2316908
>2030 - ? China
I don't get why people do these things when 2030 is 10+ years and a new premier away

>>2303924
16th century century of spain/hapsburgs
17th century century of france
18th century was a flux, with britain and france vying for supremecy on the global stage and austria, prussia and russia all pitching in on the european stage, it was definitely not frances century

>>2317064
>18th century was a flux, with britain and france vying for supremecy on the global stage and austria, prussia and russia all pitching in on the european stage, it was definitely not frances century
t.Nigel Farage

>>2317079
war of spanish succession and seven years war, france was in effective decline throughout the period, they 'won' the spanish succession only when the british withdrew because the austrian claimant had become the heir to the austrian throne as well meaning that victory for the anglo austrian alliance would lead to a reunion of the hapsburg lands, thus instead they negotiated a satisfactory deal with france.

and france lost the seven years war as well.

>>2303924
Why China not USA again?

>>2317164
>war of spanish succession and seven years war, france was in effective decline throughout the period, they 'won' the spanish succession only when the british withdrew because the austrian claimant had become the heir to the austrian throne as well meaning that victory for the anglo austrian alliance would lead to a reunion of the hapsburg lands, thus instead they negotiated a satisfactory deal with france.
>and france lost the seven years war as well.
Those are the only 2 victories of Britain in an entire century Johnny.If the French revolution didn't happen Britain wouldn0t have had become a dominant power

>>2317215
Because the burgers are electing populist leaders that want to withdraw from the world because they're afraid of gardeners and fruit pickers. I shit you not, they're so afraid that they want to build a 2000 mile long wall to "protect" themselves from the gardeners and fruit pickers.

>>2313335
>Visigoths
Never. They were a symptom of a larger century defining problem, but they never defined a century themselves.
>15th century - Ottomans
The 16th century was the Ottomans'. By 1499 they hadn't hit anywhere near their future peak.
>France defining the 17th and 18th centuries
How? I mean, yes, they did many things, but so where a lot of kingdoms at the time. What did France do in the 17th and 18th centuries that made it more defining than Britain or Austria? France's true defining moment was at the beginning of the 19th century.
>21th century - European Empire
lol

>>2317360
Did I hit a nerve Cletus Tyrone? Everyone knows that Trump was elected because muh isolationism, let's go back to 1920.

>>2306754
This
After the thirty years war, France emerged strengthened and increasingly dominant in Europe with Richelieu and the Ancien regime.

>>2317228
>If the French revolution didn't happen
It did, first of all. Second, France was headed for some trouble because it was headed toward insolvency in the 1780s. Third, France won the French Revolutionary Wars. Napoleon maintained French hegemony but ultimately lost and had he not returned from Elba in the 100 days France would have gotten off scott-free and maybe would have maintained more power. Instead, after Waterloo the victorious powers put huge reparations on France and wreaked havoc during their occupation.

>>2317455
Also saying "only 2 victories" hides the fact that these led to drastic shifts in geopolitical power. The Seven Year's War ended with the loss of most of the French overseas empire in India and the Americas.

>>2303924
21st century is still happening

17th century = Century of the Netherlands (and France)

16th century = Century of Iberia

15th century = Century of the Ottomans

14th century = Century of the Slavs (aka best century)

>>2317530
>Century of the Slavs
lol, you wish.

>>2317215
China has a larger economy than the US already.

>>2317891
>China has a larger economy than the US already.
in what respect? china is the largest exporter in the world, for example, but us has the highest gdp as far as i know.

>>2315872
>it was the technology and not the incredibly advanced militarism of the japanese society

>>2318157
iirc the US has a lower absolute GDP by PPP in 2016

>>2304068
14th century - Century of Serbia

>>2318179
on quick search i think this explains the ppp thing pretty well. its true but misleading by some accounts

>>2318353
PPP is a better measure than absolute GDP, I'd say. Absolute GDP is simply not relevant most of the time since what we're actually interested in is what it can do with the money

>>2318353
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30483762

>>2318364
PPP is a meme value because it's arbitrarily set to America's prices as the standard

>>2318537
The point of PPP via the one price theory or whatever it's called is that you can use literally anyone's values though, people use the US dollar and US purchasing power because the US is considered the economic standard for soem dumbass reason.

>>2317530
The Renaissance?

>century of China
yeah, fake economic growth is really going to catapult China to be the world's superpower.

>>2303924
>18th century - Century of France
France was fucked in 18th century, Nepolianic Wars took place in 19th century.

>>2303924
The only thing China's going for them since the 1980's is really cheap labor. Once robots take over, they are done for.

>>2317382

If you could ask the people of the times who defined the century, they would answer Goths. If you fast forward to the middle ages they'd still answer it was the Goths. Everything related to the germanic invasion period was known as the Gothic age. There was even an artistic style reflecting on that.

The Visigoths killed the Empire, but they also preserved the roman culture and saved it from the Huns at Chalons.

>>2321599
Being defined by goths, and visigoths are two different things.

10th century BC and below is the era of the global Finnish empire.