Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    squeehunter's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    84

    Default Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    I liked playing as Rome in RTW (EB actually because it's the best) because historically they expanded their territory very far within the given time frame. What are some factions (if any) that did the same in the Early Campaign? I'm fine with playing "alternate history" but I'd like to start with something more realistic.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    I'm interested in this too. I'm not a huge history buff, but it really seems like besides the Mongols, there wasn't really a huge dominating nation?

    Charlemagne did some expansion for the franks, but that was in the 750s-800s.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    surly ottomans,and maybe mamluks?

  4. #4

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Lithuania expanded into the Ukraine and Russia, and was later part of the Union Lublin which also added polish terretories.
    "See, when you carry the two over, it turns out you owe me another hundred florins."

  5. #5
    Biarchus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Kraków, Poland
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Well... Polish-Lithuania commonwealth did expand a lot, but it was in the late medieval/after medieval times.

    Edit: And btw. I can't agree that Lublin Union "added" Polish territories to Lithuana.
    Last edited by Nzg; January 26, 2014 at 05:24 AM.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nzg View Post
    Well... Polish-Lithuania commonwealth did expand a lot, but it was in the late medieval/after medieval times.

    Edit: And btw. I can't agree that Lublin Union "added" Polish territories to Lithuana.
    I were in a rush and haven't the time to well nuance my post.

    Well, in the comon defintion the period between the 5th and 15th century was the Middle Age, other views count even the following centuries still to the Middle Age...

    Fact is the great duchy of lithuania anexied multiple former Rus terretories.

    Here is a map



    Even in the general defintion, Lithuania hold a big area in medieval ages.

    1386 Lithuania and Poland created the Union von Krewo, which was a dynastic union between Poland and Lithuania.

    For example, Jogalia was King of Poland from 1386–1434, and grandduke of Lithuania from 1377–1434.

    I know technically there was no ONE kingdom or something alike...But on the other hand there are multiple other examples of states/kingdomes/principalities with more or less solid terretories, which are general also more or less accepted as one simple reign/kingdom. For example the HRE or the Rus. It's difficult.
    "See, when you carry the two over, it turns out you owe me another hundred florins."

  7. #7
    Biarchus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Kraków, Poland
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Well, yeah. Lithuana was one of the largest(counting territory) factions in medieval Europe, that I can't deny. I just felt bad by the word "added" since it was a merger.

    The history of Polish-Lithuana is well known to me so no problem

    Actualy after Lublin Union, I'd call it one country since it merged territories and Poland after that was more concerned about it's eastern politic. On the other had the diversity was high and both Lithuana and Polish nobles weren't the same and had more influence in their separate countries.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    I can't tell you this is 100% correct but one of the professors as a interesting fact(with him we are actually studying ancient history) mentioned that most of the lands acquired by Algridas and Vytautas on a rus'(I think) map from around the time when Lithuania was in control of them are marked as just swamp or uninhibited/sparsely inhabited, so the land they controlled had little real value.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sharpe View Post
    Fair enough about your family values preventing you from drinking, my family values prohibit me from not drinking.

  9. #9
    Biarchus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Kraków, Poland
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    That's why I mentioned it as territorialy largest Eastern Europe was mostly composed of spacious empty terrains.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Yea, aside from the Mongols in the east, there werent any european factions that took over a lot of foreign lands in the middle ages.
    The English took much of northern France during the 100 years war, but quickly lost it. If you jump to the 1700-1800s, the British had a pretty sizable Empire around the world.
    France had Italy, Spain and most of western Europe for a breif time under Napolean and Germany expanded alot to the south and west during WWII.

    But, the Romans were the first/last "world" dominating Empire.
    Last edited by Duck of Death; January 26, 2014 at 07:46 PM.
    Honest and truly, I AM Robin Hood!

  11. #11
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Quote Originally Posted by stevietheconquer View Post
    surly ottomans,and maybe mamluks?
    The Ottomans can count here but their conquest was rather slow, actually extremely slow when you look at their European conquests(for example it took them 130 years to conquer the area of present day Bosnia).
    Still, most of the territories they took was valuable and populated, while on the other side, 30-40% of mamluk conquests were desserts and unpopulated coastal areas of the Levant.

    Actually, what most people tend to miss out is that when looking at the map of the Mongolian empire, you can clearly see that about 70% of their empire was a huge wasteland that they just strolled through and claimed, not actually fighting anyone because noone was there

    Quote Originally Posted by Vissewalde rex de Gerzika View Post
    I can't tell you this is 100% correct but one of the professors as a interesting fact(with him we are actually studying ancient history) mentioned that most of the lands acquired by Algridas and Vytautas on a rus'(I think) map from around the time when Lithuania was in control of them are marked as just swamp or uninhibited/sparsely inhabited, so the land they controlled had little real value.
    Whelp, most of the landmass of planet Earth was either a forest, swamp or any other type of uninhabitable zone until the hard work of the nameless mass of peasants plowed through them to make fields for agriculture.

    On the point of that land area at that time;

    Since about 1220 because of the Ostsiedlung ,existing towns adopted the German town law (Lübeck law, Magdeburg law and Kulm law), and new ones are established with these laws, woods and swamps are cleared and settled, existing villages are expanded and reorganized, new villages are founded.

    We can safely assume that the same was done in those areas considering that we are talking about conquests that happened centuries later when those areas were heavily influenced by the presence of the Teutonic Order that was the poster child of the Ostsiedlung.

    On topic;

    Maybe not that much of an expansion, but consider this; its not how much you take that matters, its what you take( erg; taking a single 15th century European city is more important than taking the entire Siberian wasteland);

    Hungary in just a single decade of conquest;
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...1458-1490).png
    Last edited by +Marius+; January 27, 2014 at 07:06 AM.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Check this out http://geacron.com/home-en/. Add the desired date and get a fairly accurate political map of the known world.

  13. #13
    Biarchus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Kraków, Poland
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Good one Thanks I'd rep but I used the limit in "who am I". Maps are quite accurate, and it's interesting to see factions expand or loose territories compared world-wide

  14. #14

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    I would say the Ottomans and Spain but the Spanish expansion was primarily in the New World though they got the Netherlands and Parts of Italy as well I believe. Additionally these were relatively late in the games time period.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Habsburg Empire (Spain+HRE) by mid 16th century was quite a big empire.

    IMO Castilla & Leon's was one of the kingdoms that expanded a lot through the middle ages and renaissance, from its origins as the small kingdom of Leon going through la Reconquista and later its union with Aragon to the XVIc habsburg empire under Karl V/Carlos I.

    Karl V later split his domains between his son and brother, Spain retained most of the territories, all the american colonies, sicily, naples, milan, sardinia, burgundy and flandes...although this is no longer in the scope of M2TW.

  16. #16
    Miles
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    336

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    That COULD be Denmark, though until around year 1100 (early campaign), Denmark had Normandy, Southern Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Greenland, England and Schleswig-Holstein. At that time Denmark had three seperate kings. First in 1157 we(i am danish) had one king - due to a civil war - and Valdemar The Great made Roskilde (not Aarhus) his capital. Also, Sicily was ruled by a danish line of kings.

    Around year 1200 we had territories in the eastern part of Baltic sea and later on, we actually had all of Scandinavia with Finland

    Look it up
    //ThaDoews

    TATW + MOS 1.
    6.2
    SS6.4 + BftB

  17. #17

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThaDoews View Post
    That COULD be Denmark, though until around year 1100 (early campaign), Denmark had Normandy, Southern Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Greenland, England and Schleswig-Holstein. At that time Denmark had three seperate kings. First in 1157 we(i am danish) had one king - due to a civil war - and Valdemar The Great made Roskilde (not Aarhus) his capital. Also, Sicily was ruled by a danish line of kings.

    Around year 1200 we had territories in the eastern part of Baltic sea and later on, we actually had all of Scandinavia with Finland

    Look it up
    That is a very strange way to see things. I don't think the actual danish king could command the norman territories. It's not like it was a united empire. Ingame-wise, this would be a generel rebelling and taking territories on his own..

    Expanding factions in the early campaign:

    France, since they actually controlled a very small area in the region in the early campaign. Their expansion throughout modern france started here.

    Aragon, definitely expanded very fast. Taking territories of the moors aswell as sicily later on.

    Rum seljuks also became pretty powerful and expanded pretty fast. Until the Mongols happened. Same with the kievan rus.

    Zengids, combined with fatimids under the ayyubid dynasty also became very powerful at this time.


    Lithuania's time began later (150 years after the early campaign start) as well as most of the other factions named here.

  18. #18
    Biarchus
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Kraków, Poland
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    There are some sources saying that early kings of Poland had their "roots" in Scandinavia(probably Denmark). It's hard to proove it undoubtfully tho.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Historically, which factions greatly increased their territory?

    I think Venice is also another that had a scattered but non the less considerable territorial expansion, more of a maritime empire if you will...but by the date the campaign ends they were heavily constested by the ottomans IIRC.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •