Cyrus, the first persian emperor, ruled in a unique fashion, employing tolerance instead of fear, however, he relentlessly expanded his empire until his death. For example, When Cyrus and his massive army conquered Babylon he freed the jews and allowed the to return to the promise land. In addition he assisted in the rebuilding of their temple. Although some argue he did this to create a buffer state between hostile egypt and his empire, i find it more likely he did this to bring more peoples under his administration. The method which he concours societies is interesting; he presents himself not as a conqueror but as a liberator freeing the people of the region from an oppressive despot. Because of theses methods it was much easier to bring people under his rule. Additionally, once he brought states under imperial control he used strategic methods to govern the newly ‘liberated’ territories. …show more content…
Theses governors were labeled satraps and their land satrapies. In this the people's loyalty never shifted even once they were absorbed into the persian empire. Because of the mentioned leadership tactics along with the impressive power of cyrus’ army, most if not all of the states and ethnic groups of the persian empire joined by choice (hegemony) rather than by dominance. The fall Cyrus’ empire was caused by a failure of leadership, as he was killed in battle attempting to overtake new lands. This failure occurred not only because of his death because he did not have a proper successor in place for his seat of emperor. As a result there were revolts through the region following his death. In conclusion, Cyrus fits the empirical model because of his fascinating approach to leadership. His compassion and tolerance for his subjects contributed to the success of his
Alexander began his military campaign and his rule much where his father left off. Whether or not it was his aim, this created a sense of normality for the men that was part of his father’s regime. Alexander’s position as a warrior-king who stood side-by-side among his men also served to create respect among his peers. Gradually, as Alexander conquered more Persian land, he began to adopt the policies of Persian rulers. Alexander’s change in policy extended beyond just political roles, he gave consideration to the local gods in many of the lands that he conquered. Eventually, Alexander brought people in from the conquered nations to serve under him.
The Emperor Claudius was both a successful and significant ruler of the Roman Empire. His control of the Senate and new bureaucratic reforms led him to improve the efficiency of the government. His most dramatic reform was the expansion of the empire and the extension of who could be granted Roman citizenship. These new reforms gained him a lot of support. Although Claudius was easily influenced by those close to him, such as his two wives and freedmen, his rule was successful and one which paved the way for other rulers after
...llectually superior leaders. Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator was a Roman general that helped during the second Punic war. As a child he was known as being very slow to learn. This made the other children think that it made him inferior, but in all actuality i think that this helped him. I think this because he learned and then remembered what he learned. He was promoted from counsul to dictator when Hannibal was approaching Romes gates and Rome was in panic because two counsul members were killed. He came up with the strategy to slowly wear Hannable out instead of meeting him head on in battle. This strategy eventually saved Rome.
...ti-colored and multi-raced people, which was something that almost none of the other ancient empires had. It was a peaceful empire and was admired by many people. It had amazing acheivements in goverment, military and communication. It was the largest empire in the Ancient World and was an amazing empire, for the 250 years it lasted. The Persian Empire will be remembered as the largest empire in the ancient world and the most tolerant.
...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.
Throughout the middle ages, many empires were working on expanding their territory, but it was not always a success unless they had the appropriate leadership to guide them in the right direction. The main empire that grew to extraordinary lengths is that of the Roman Empire. Through many conquests and battles and with an amicable government, it attained its fortune. However, on the other hand, there was another government that shared similarities with that of Rome; this was the empire of Charlemagne, otherwise known as the Carolingian Empire, but it failed to have a prosperous eternity.
Through the Divine Right of Kingship the Emperor, King or Sultan is considered God’s regent on earth. This puts tremendous responsibility on the leaders, so they need to keep their priorities straight. They also need to be viewed as an almighty ruler in not only their empire’s eyes, but the eyes of other empires as well. In some cases they are feared because they are so powerful and their power comes from a divine
The great empires that flourished between 300 B.C.E and 200 B.C.E. can all be broken down into the four factors the contributed to their rise. Although each empire faced prolonged periods of conflict, all four empires succeeded in imposing unity and order among the people. The rise of these empires can be attributed to four specific factors crucial to their construction. The factors crucial to the rise of the great empires included having a centralized form of leadership with enforced uniform legal codes, having powerful military forces, a strong economy, and technological advances. Ultimately an efficiently run, centralized government along side powerful military forces caused the success of the empires however in the same not a decentralized form of leadership and weakened military attributed to the great empires eventual collapse.
Domitian inherited the empire when his brother suddenly died after ruling for only two years. He became Roman Emperor in 81AD which fulfilled his lifelong dream. He was now able to follow in his father and brother’s footsteps as emperor. When he was emperor he traveled outside of Rome many times. He was said to be a hostile ruler.
At an undetermined point in the history of man, a people, while still in the state of nature, allowed one person to become their leader and judge over controversies. This was first the patriarch of a family, then the wisest or fittest militarily of a tribe. These leaders ruled by wisdom and discretion, though neither they nor their followers were subject to any ratified laws. These rulers represented the earliest signs of an emerging hierarchical order, yet did not constitute a government in the formal sense.
The ruler of the eastern roman empire known as Justinian, he was a very active emperor, as a result of this he had many great achievements. Some of Justinian’s most recognized achievements was, he conquered many areas of territory, he made his own code of law called the Justinian code, he also built the Hagia Sophia which was the biggest church of that time. The bryzantine empire lasted so long because of its location and geography. The bryzantine empire influenced later civilizations through religion which was Christianity and architecture.
From the 18th century through the beginning of the 19th century, European influence was a significant force in various aspects of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, and Iran. Although the reforms, coined primarily by Gelvin as “defensive developmentalism,” were initially intended to centralize governmental control and strengthen the military, the actual effects were much broader. Based on varying pre-existing conditions and unique approaches to governorship, this process of modernization affected each region differently. This essay will explore the manners in which European influence shaped each territory, the primary areas of civilization, politics and culture that experienced reform, and the degree to which that influence was significant, or in the case of Iran, insignificant.
Augustus is arguably the most successful ruler in the history of ancient western civilization, and his was one of the greatest constructive successes in history. He inherited an empire on the verge of complete collapse. Rome had undergone almost a centuries worth of civil unrest: assassinations, riots, and outright civil wars. He evoked order out of chaos. Peace was re-established and the madness of armed conflict was squelched in every part of the Republic. He succeeded in overhauling and reforming almost every Roman institution. He also helped to establish the Roman Empire on a much more rational basis. His reforms carried the Roman Empire for almost 200 years, and this, the most creative period of the Roman Empire, is often called the Age of Augustus.
The Persian Empire spanned from Egypt in the west to Turkey in the north, and through Mesopotamia to the Indus River in the east. It was a series of imperial dynasties centered in Persia. It was established by Cyrus the Great in 550 BC, with the Persian conquest of Media, Lydia and Babylonia. The Persian history was interrupted by the Islamic conquest and later by the Mongol invasion. The main religion of ancient Persia was Zoroastrianism, but after the 7th century this was replaced by Islam. In the modern era, a series of Islamic dynasties ruled Persia independently of the universal caliphate. Since 1979 Persia has been an Islamic republic. In 552 BCE Cyrus led his armies against the Medes and captured Ecbatana in 549 BCE, effectively conquering the Median Empire
For Plato, like many Greeks of his day, the individual was subordinate to the state. Political participation was paramount, so when he discusses leadership, he is talking about leadership of the State. Because society is more im...