The Safavid Empire, a prominent theocracy, prospered in the early modern period. With the glorious capital of Isfahan, the Safavid Empire left a legacy full of trade, art and wealth. However, the empire braved a rough decline due to the government's oppressive actions, the lack of structure and external forces. While there were many attempts to rebuild, the reign of the Safavid Empire ended in 1722. The Safavid Empire faced a harsh decline due to religious differences, lack of substantial leadership and external pressures.
One of the main reasons for the decline of the Safavid Empire was the religious difference between the Shi’a and Sunni factions of the Islamic religion. Shah Ismail, the heroic founder of the Safavid dynasty, declared the
…show more content…
However, this attempt at conversion turned violent. While Shah Ismail was expanding the borders of his Empire, he ventured into Kurdistan (Encyclopædia Iranica). All the Sunni’s were pursued or driven out or even killed (Encyclopædia Iranica). Shah Ismail was willing to use violence to preserve a nation based on Shi’ism, showing how he ignored other possibilities to maintain nationalism. However, continuous years of forced conversion led to an uprising. Mir Veis, an Afghan from the Ghilzai tribe from Kandahar, was wealthy, generous and a Sunni Muslim (Axworthy). The Kandahar governor sent him to Isfahan where he was allowed to go to Mecca and secure a fatwa allowing a coup against the Safavid Empire (Axworthy). Mir Veis returned to Kandahar, organized a rebellion and killed the governor (Axworthy). Armies were sent from the capital by the Safavid Empire to fight the rebellion (Axworthy). The armies failed to quell the uprisings, which ignited more resistance in other cities (Axworthy). Mir Veis died in 1715, but in 1719, his son Mahmud raided the Iranian plateau (Axworthy). In 1721, Mahmud created an army …show more content…
For both smaller cities and the empire as a whole, the rulers were unable to make effective and smart decisions to control their subjects. One such example is the Safavid Governor of Kandahar (Axworthy). He was a Georgian, attempting to help spread Shi’ism where many Afghans from the Ghilzai tribe lived (Axworthy). The governor was scared Mir Veis would start a rebellion and decided to send him to the capital, Isfahan (Axworthy). This proved to be an ignorant action, as Mir Veis was given permission from the Shah to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca (Axworthy). While in Mecca, he acquired a fatwa allowing a rebellion against Safavid authority (Axworthy). The Safavid governor was unable to make effective decisions and failed to prevent an uprising. Shah Sultan Hosein displayed similar ineffectual leadership. He decided not to fight on the battle of Golnabad on March 8, 1722 (Axworthy). While the previous Shah’s always rode out in battle, Shah Sultan Hussein stayed in comfort and let his troops flee to Isfahan where the Afghan tribe laid siege to the capital (Axworthy). Had the Shah rode into battle with his troops, perhaps they might have been more victorious and united. He distanced himself from his troops, an action a real leader would not have taken. Both the Safavid Governor and the Shah failed to demonstrate leadership. This lack of effective command deeply contributed to the
Two of the most powerful powers in the post-classical period were the Arabian and Byzantine empires. Each had different political, religious, and economic differences that defined their respective cultures, and managing to create vast empires that greatly rivaled each other.
had to pick a new leader. He chose the Duke of Medina Sidonia. He was
The Persian Empire and the Roman Empire are among the greatest empires the world has ever seen. The Persian Empire dynasties that were centered in Persia. The dynasties were formed as a result of conquest by ancient rulers such as the conquest of Babylonia, Lydia and Medina and later other dynasties followed to form the great Persian Empire. The vast empire spanned large geographical area which featured Turkey to its northern side and Egypt to its west and also ran through Mesopotamia. The Roman Empire was also a large empire that featured governance that was led by emperors. The Empire had large territories in places like Europe, Asia, and Africa. This paper is going to compare the Roman and Persian empires in relation to highlighting their successes and the assimilation of their conquered subjects into a centralized
In ancient Greece, Sparta was known as a prominent city-state and a dominant military power, emerging victorious in numerous armed conflicts. Sparta’s success was believed to be attributed to its political and social system, which mainly focused on military training, and was created by the constitution drawn up by Lycurgus, a lawgiver. However, Sparta progressively declined and in 371 BC, they suffered a calamitous defeat at the Battle of Leuctra, ceasing to be a dominant military power. While various reasons could have led to Sparta’s decline, it was primarily population issues, which appeared to be due to Sparta’s overly strict citizenship requirements, which ultimately led to Sparta’s defeat at the Battle of Leuctra. This essay will examine how Sparta’s demanding citizenship requirements were linked to the strict military requirements, corruption and unequal land distribution, which reduced the number of male Spartans in the population, causing
The first empire that rose was the Akkadians. They were the first group of people who conquered Sumer and made it a great place. The Akkadians were controlled by King Sargon. Sargon created a formation called the tsudo. The tsudo was when there was men with shields and then behind them men held spears and then behind the spears men were archers with bows and arrows. Sargon also used many political strategies to help him rule the empire. Sargon ruled the empire for 56 years, during those years Sargon made a city called Agade and this city was located in northern Mesopotamia. This city had tributes from the people Sargon has conquered. Agade was one of the most richest and most powerful cities in the world. He had wished for his empire to last forever. But the soon kings had found out that it was hard to rule a large territory. Later the empire started to grow weak and lost many people. After 200 years the Akkadian empire fell to the new invaders from
...adical reform. Unlike Mahmud II, Isma’il’s gave considerable power to European powers rather than strengthening the Egypt’s central government. He hoped stronger ties with Europe would lead to modernization. The result, however, was large amounts of debt and a complete loss of political autonomy (Cleveland 97). The third reformer was Nasir al-Din Shah of Iran. Much of the power in Iran in the nineteenth century lied with the Shi’a leaders, the ulama, and local tribes. Unable to centralize power, Nasir al-Din’s reforms failed and he was forced to sell concessions to European powers out of desperation for money. All three reformers tried similar techniques to modernize their countries; yet, the success of these reforms was varied. The biggest factor in deciding whether reforms would be successful or not was a country’s ability to maintain a strong central government.
In their times The Mughal and Ottoman empires were some of the greatest and most successful empires of all time. Both empires were lead by strong rulers, Suleiman in the Ottoman Empire and Akbar in the Mughal. However, the Mughal empire failed due to the weak successors that could not unite the huge empire after Akbar’s demise leading the empire to fall apart.
Meanwhile, a group of local people by the name Guti controlled the mountainous area of the western Iran. They took advantage of periods of weakness of A...
First, the Shah, out-of-touch with what his people wanted, became the catalyst for massive xenophobic and anti-Western feelings to spread throughout the nation. By giving up traditional Islamic ideals and becoming sort of a “puppet” for the U.S. and the Western world, the Shah made a mockery of himself and of those traditional Islamic values, which were paramount in Iran. For many years, Iranians wrote letters to the Shah, voicing their discontent with many aspects of his rule — the spread of the Bahá’í Faith, the collapse of Islamic traditions, and the crumbling economy. The Shah, however, did nothing to fix these issues. Instead, he designed a political reformation movement, hoping to silence his opponents, to introduce personal rights for women, and to establish a sense of fiscal equality. This series of reforms, which appeared to be a blatant attempt to Westernize Iran, became known as the “White
Reza Shah Pahlavi’s rise to power ended the 131-year reign of the Kajar dynasty and established the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925. Much to the chagrin of not only Muslim clerics, but also the general population, Reza Shah Pahlavi leaned heavily towards secular ...
Ludwig, P. (1999). Iranian Nation and Islamic Revolutionary Ideology. Die Welt des islams. 39(2). 183-217.
Muhammad was very knowledgeable and knew that to take over Mecca and get Meccans to convert to Islam would be by raiding Meccan Caravans. Muhammad commanded his own military even though he had no experience in military dealings, except briefly when he was fourteen he went alongside his uncle to retrieve arrows to shoot back at the enemy (Gabriel 55). He commanded a lot of battles and raids, but there are four major battles he commanded; the battle of Badr,
The decline of the Abbasids was not a steady of rapid series of events. There were numerous revivals of the Caliphate in which certain strong Caliphs gained more control and influence over the Islamic world than their predecessors had had. However at no point after the death of Harun al-Rahid (reigned 786-809) was the Caliphate ever as powerful. This period is regarded as the Golden Age of the Abbasid Caliphate and was followed immediately by civil war between his sons. Harun’s two sons were called Al-Amin and Al-Mamun. Al-Amin was the elder and was nominated as the heir to the Caliphate. However Al-Mamun, who was the effective governor of the eastern provinces was ambitious. He was spurred towards seizing the Caliphate for himself by his prominent advisor Al-Fadl. In 810 he declared himself an Iman causing his brother to disinherit and dispatch a great army to snuff out his ever increasing dominance of the Caliphate east of Baghdad. It seemed likely that Al-Mamun would be defeated, his army numbered around 4,000 men but faced 40,000. However he was fortunate in his commander, called Tahir bin Husain, who won him a spectacular victory at Rayy in 811. Tahir proceeded to siege Baghdad in 812. In that year Al-Amin was captured and forced to hand over the office of Caliph to al-Mamun. Al-Amin was executed after trying to escape Baghdad after it had been captured.
Most of the civilizations throughout history have been taken over or replaced by other civilizations due to disunity and chaos. Although an empire might seem prosperous, the decline and fall of empires are sometimes inevitable. Even though an empire might seem invincible, there are many factors that could lead to the sudden decline or fall of an empire. Over many centuries, historians have composed many reasons, such as weak militaries, economic burdens, dynastic successions, and external enemies, which have been known to contribute to the rise and fall of many once successful empires.
Throughout history, there have been a variety of great and powerful empires. However, regardless of how powerful they were able to become, each empire had it's unfortunate downfall and ultimate ending. Perhaps two of the most powerful empires ever to exist and crumble were the Roman and Egyptian empires, both of which enjoyed long periods of wealth and success in their pasts. While the two empires operated on extremely different terms and conditions, there is undoubtedly good reason for comparison of their downfalls considering that the causes generally surrounded the fact that the empire suffered invasions. Of course, this was not the only reason in either case, but in both circumstances invasion played a significant role in the fall.