Comparing The Rise And Fall Of The Gunpowder Empires

The Gunpowder empires were similar politically through three reason. The first reason is that they all had a golden age led by a great leader. The Mughals, during the rule of Akbar, the Ottomans with Suleiman the Magnificent and the Safavids through Shah Abbas. All of these rulers were known for their religious tolerance, reformation of government, and encouragement of the arts and architecture. The second similarity is that they all had great expansions during this time. For example, through conquering many battles, the Safavids expanded into the caucasus mountains (northeast of Turkey), the Ottomans stretched across three continents, and the Mughals into Pakistan and Baluchistan. Finally, the last similarity is that they all had various degrees

It is evident that the two main largest classical empires were the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire under the rule of the Han kings. These two empires had many social, political, and economic features in common, but likewise many of those features different from one another. A political feature that both classical empires shared was that both had powerful executive emperors who held absolute power. A second political feature that both empires had in common is that both empires had a central governmental body which maintained order, organized funds, collected taxes, and made executive decisions. Socially, the two empires also had features in common. The first similarity between the Roman social organization and the Han social organization

From 1567 to 330 B.C. humanity experienced many subsequent development as well as decline in its civilizations. Among these events emerged three colossal empires that had shaken the world and forever changed the course of human history. The Egyptian, Assyrian, and Persian Empires have been instrumental in influencing technology, religion, and ideas throughout the world. Various factors have contributed to the success and downfall of these giants. Each of the “World Powers” have similarities as well as distinctions in its government form and organization, religion, and economy that contributed to their triumph.

Empires on their outside may seem very different and unique. However, when you get down to their fundamentals, you begin to truly realize how similar they are. Just as the imposing pine tree and humble tomato plant may seem vastly different, their start from a lowly seed and craving for water and sunlight to survive unifies them. Such is also true with the Han and Roman empires. While key differences may be present, their social structures, influencing religions, and causes of collapse unify them.

After the rise and fall of the earliest civilizations, some of the very first ancient empires started to emerge over many centuries before the birth of Christ. Although there are many things that characterize these empires uniquely from each other, there are still resemblances between them. Despite the fact that both Persia and China were great empires in two different regions, their governing methods coincide in the systems of organization and basic infrastructures; but they differed greatly in the beliefs of both the government and people.

On the Political side, the Ottoman Turks were the best at keeping up control for a more extended time. It could get by to the point that advanced circumstances. The two different realms crumbled by the seventeenth century. The pioneer of the Ottoman Turks was known as the Sultan which was like a ruler. Islamic Law was connected to all Muslims. With respect to Safavid realm politically, the Shahs strolled around the boulevards in mask keeping in mind the end goal to discover the genuineness of the nationals. The high positions were given by justifying and regularly were nonnatives. In the Mughal Empire politically, Even,

The post-classical era in history (600CE- 1250CE) saw the rise and fall of many great empires. In the early part of the era, the Islamic Caliphates acted as a core region in the Middle East, heavily influencing the region around them. On the other side of the world, the Aztec Empire rose to power in the later part of the era with minimal trans-regional influence. Although on different sides of the world, both empires found similar ways to adapt to their diverse environments. In the post-classical era, the rise of the Islamic Caliphates and the Aztec Empire were similar in that they established cohesion through their respective cultures and used military conquest to come to power. Although there are similarities in the rise of power in the Caliphates and the Aztec Empire, there is a difference in the speed of expansion given that the Caliphates were located in a central trading region while the Aztec Empire was not.

Chau’s thesis that the rise and fall of empires was due to tolerance, inclusion, difference, and diversity is shown to be true of the Roman Empire because of the way that tolerance allowed and caused the empire to rise, enter its golden age, and fall. The Roman Empire was a “hyperpower” that lasted from 44 BCE to 476 CE. The empire contained Western, Southern, and Eastern Europe, along with North Africa; thus, there was an abundance of culture from many different conquered groups. Romans wanted to make these conquered nations provinces of Rome. The Roman Empire began (and the Roman Republic ended) with the assassination of Julius Caesar, who wanted to be a dictator. No longer a republic, the lands already ruled by Rome became part of an empire. The government became centralized with a single ruler, the emperor. However, even before the empire, during the Republic, there was also the similar feeling of wanting to conquer other nations was there.

Throughout time empires have risen and fallen and taken various approaches in doing so. Some of these society were warlike, while others focused on intellectual discovery. Among these various societies were great empires like the Ottoman, the Mughal, the Spanish, and the Ming. All four of these great empire ruled at overlapping times but all eventually fell for different reasons. All had strengths and weakness and can be used as a learning opportunity for an empire that came after them. From the Ming and the Ottoman you can learn strength such as religious tolerance and government structure. On the other hand, the Mughal and the Spanish teach us the dangers of over taxing and over centralizing government. In order for an empire to successfully function they must have an accepting culture, a balanced economy, and manageable size.

The decline of the Mongol Empire laid ground for the Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal empires. These three empires all had military strength, Sovereign Pride, Religious commitment, and Aesthetic sophistication in common to varying degrees. The Safavid and Ottoman empires are usually compared because of the wars that broke out between them and their similar attributes. However, this will be a comparison of the Safavid and Mughal Empires.

On a religious point of view for all the empires. The Governments in all 3 were muslim based. Mughals were the only group that was not predominately Muslim. Muslims were only a small minority Ottomans were Sunni Muslims. The Ottoman titles were claimed to be caliphs. They maintained Islamic law called Sandri'a. Only applied to Ottoman Muslims. Ottoman minorities were mostly

The Ottoman Empire: The Ottoman dynasty, in which, was named for its founder Osman Bey, a leader of a band of semi-nomadic Turks who migrated to northwestern Anatolia in the thirteenth century. Osman and his followers sought to become ghazi warriors who fought for their faith.

Since the beginning, all empires have faced change in many ways, declining and rising in status. Many empires have collapsed, only to start again under a different name. Like all empires, the three Muslim Empires, the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals have faced this inevitable state. Although each individual empire is different, they each have similarities in their reasons for decline. Whether it is social, religious, economic, or political reasons, the empires, like many others, have fallen.

The foundations of an ancient empire are shaped by many characteristics originating in a civilization’s social, philosophical, and theological values. Collectively these will bring about an empire that has aspects which will classify them in distinctive ways. The aspects that will be compared between Persia and Rome are the motives for expansion, methods of expansion, the administration, the impact on those conquered and the original empire, and the reasons for the decline of each empire. When combined, these aspects predispose the individual overall shape of ancient Rome and Persia. Both empires began with conquering larger rulers and creating vast empires which had never been seen

In this week’s chapter, it discusses a lot about the rise and fall of the Ottoman and Safavid Empires. In many dynasties, it is critically important to have a well balanced society and economy. Anderson displays many of the reasons why these two empires were so great during their time, but evidently loss of power and control of government can be a major turning point and, eventually, led to the decline of these empires. This specific chapter focus on the systems of governance that was established in each empire.