How Did The Macedonians Rule Over The Golden Age Of Byzantium?

follow. That was the first goal of icons. The second goal was to form an

Though both had similar roots, they both took these similar bases & formed it into their own way. Both the Byzantine Empire and Ancient Roman have similar aspects, but each one made it unique. To better understand the similarities and differences of the Byzantine Empire and Ancient Romans one must look at each civilization’s cultural ideas, religion, & dependence on lower class.

The Byzantine Empire and Western Europe originally were part of the Roman Empire, but by the middle Ages(medieval times), they were very different, even though they did share some common traits, but by the 300's, the Byzantine Empire had far surpassed Western Europe in trade and economics and political unity, while both empires were having arguments over religion.

Great men have lived on the face of the earth and left marks of their prowess and legacy that men of the present and even the future find it hard to emulate; a good example of such men is Alexander the Great. This paper seeks to explain further Alexander’s military genius and its positive impact on military impact over the past centuries. The paper also gives a well thought analysis why Alexander was so much successful in his wars and conquests. His big empire spread all the way from Gibraltar to the Punjab and in his leadership made Greek the lingua franca of his new World (Cary, M, 1932).

Nothing that Constantine the Great did shows his ability more clearly than his seizing upon the site of old Byzantium for the location for his new capital. The place was admirably sited for an imperial residence, being over against Asia which the Persians were threatening, and in easy touch with the Danube, where the Northern Barbarians were always swarming… (Sozomen)

The fall of the Roman Empire in 476 C.E resulted in many tragedies, as history “replays” itself, this fall led to starts, the land that was once known as Rome split into two pieces, the eastern part known as the Byzantine Empire and the western part known as medieval Western Europe. However, the empires wasn’t one that overtook Rome, the Byzantine Empire was rather known as a continuation of the Roman Empire, which was known to be more politically centralized than Western Europe, and the two empires were known to have different religious aspects as well, though there are differences in these empires, being both emerged from Rome led them to having similar aspects in many ways as well.

For centuries, Alexander the Great has held an eminent place in history. Arguably one of the greatest men the world has ever known, the Macedonian King accomplished many great feats in his short, but glorious life. During his reign, Alexander played several roles in the process of conquering the Persian empire, and in the assessment of his character, aspects of Alexander's capabilities of both strengths and weaknesses must be explored in him as a person, a statesman and a leader.

There were many powerful civilizations during the post-classical era, but these civilizations grew powerful using different methods of religion, governments, and class systems. Some of these civilization share many commonalities amongst each other. The Roman Empire was copied by the Byzantine Empire in many ways, while the Chinese empires used different methods of raising its people. The religion of these civilizations would often reflect how the country would be ruled. The similarities and differences between these civilizations can be viewed though out the post-classical era.

Only a small number of people in the world have ever earned the title, "Great". Alexander III of Macedonia is one of lucky few. Alexander the Great started his reign in Macedonia at the age of twenty after his father was assassinated. He then proceeded to expand his kingdom to the largest in the world. So, just how great was he? Alexander the Great was an undeniably brilliant military strategist, yet you could still argue that he doesn't deserve his title because of his cruel treatment of his conquered people and massive ego. This paper will cover his greatness, not-so-greatness, and why he can be a little bit of both.

Alexander the so-called ‘Great’ was a legendary conqueror who in his short lifetime was able to overthrow the Persian Empire, the most powerful kingdom at that time. He was born in 356 BCE to King Philip and Queen Olympia of Macedonia. Alexander’s warring career jumpstarted at the age of 20 in the year 336 BCE, due to the assassination of his father in which he inherited his father’s kingdom. Over the span of 11 years, Alexander and his small fleet of men of about 40,000 took over and ruthlessly conquered the Persian Empire. Sadly, this conquest was short-lived by Alexander’s sudden death in the year 323 BCE, in which his unstable kingdom with a lack of a structured governmental system quickly broke apart in the period of 10 years. Therefore, because of the cruel and the disorganized nature of the way Alexander the ‘Great’ conquered and maintained the Persian Empire, he does not deserve to be referred as ‘Great’.

After reading the text book about the Roman Empire. I found that the Roman Empire was divided into two parts. The Western half, ruled by Rome, fell to the tribal Germanic peoples in the 5th century. The Eastern half, known as the Byzantine Empire, until it began to decline in power, the Byzantine Empire was one of the leading civilizations in the world. The first Christian emperor became sole ruler of the Roman Empire. He set up his colony of Byzantium. The city, renamed Constantinople after its founder, It became the capital of the Byzantines after the Roman Empire was formally divided.

Einhard’s The Life of Charlemagne is one of several prominent texts from Mediaeval Europe. The main focus of the text is on the life of Charlemagne, the Frankish king from the Carolingian dynasty. Under his rule, the Frankish kingdom experiences an extensive period of prosperity and growth, especially in intellectually related areas since Charlemagne himself is a well-known patron of the arts (#). Hence, Charlemagne is the ruler often credited for the “Roman revival” across Mediaeval Europe. In order to ensure that Charlemagne’s glorious reign will leave its mark in history, all of Charlemagne’s works and accomplishments are accounted for Einhard’s book. As expressed in the preface of the book, Einhard’s intention is to document the life of the greatest king that is often overlooked in other texts (*). Four essential facts are noted in The Life of Charlemagne: 1) The prevalence of alliances & foreign relations 2) Cultural revolution through public works & endorsement of the arts 3) Promotion of the Christian faith 4) Public reforms throughout the state. The Frankish kingdom rises as the dominant post-Roman European entity through the political and economical stabilization of the state with the use of foreign alliances. Emperor Charlemagne is said to have close relations with Kings of Persia, Scotland, and Constantinople (*). Prosperity in the Frankish kingdom is due to the frequent correspondences that exist between these European states, further promoting the flow of

The year was 359 BC. Greece, though weary from constant internal struggling still had supreme power over the Hellenistic world. Persia, though it had suffered large setback in the Persian Wars more then a century before was still a menacing force. The Barbarian State of Macedon was led by warrior kings who aspired to be Greek, yet ruled over a feudal society that was as multicultural as any of its time. Good morning Miss Boeston and class. Today's seminar will conclusively prove to you the statement that "Philip II of Macedon was responsible for the rise to greatness of the Macedonian Empire in the Fourth Century BC" by examining several issues associated with Philip's rule.

At the age of twenty Alexander the Great inherited the great Macedonia empire. Ian Worthington article How “Great” was

The purpose of this research paper is to examine why the Byzantine Empire lost the Battle of Manzikert, and how Romanus Diogenes was incapable of being a leader during the Battle of Manzikert with quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine and make the relations between the causes and the results clear for nowadays’ states that this may show them how to survive longer in peace in the world as a sovereign