Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Was xerxes bound to fail in Greece
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Was xerxes bound to fail in Greece
Within 21 years of Xerxes reign to the Persian empire, Xerxes impact and legacy to is questionable from the successes and failures of: the military and administration contributions. From the use of sources such as the Harem inscription “When my father Darius went away from the throne, but the grace of Ahuramazda, I became king on my father’s throne. When I become king, I did much that was excellent. What had been built by my father, I protected, and I added other buildings” is essential and useful in assessing Xerxes’ legacy. Xerxes was assassinated in 465BC as his people were unhappy in how he ruled his empire. The impact of his death has led to numerous royals being betrayed, leading to a battle within the royal court, determining who’ll …show more content…
Though Darius died in the year after the revolt, Xerxes repressed the Egypt revolt in 486BC “year after Darius’ death, he sent an army against the Egyptian rebels and decisively crushed them” (Herodotus). Although this caused Xerxes to become unpopular in Egypt, the Egyptians were submissive and displayed loyalty to Xerxes “twenty-five years of tranquillity followed… Egyptians were submissive subjects of the Persian crown, and even showed remarkable courage and skill in the Persian military expeditions” (George Rawlinson). However, Xerxes had to punish Babylon revolted twice. This indicated to historians that the Xerxes wasn’t successful in punishing the Babylonians the first time they revolted. Babylon has been severely punished “Babylon had revolted and that the satrap Zopyrus had been killed… Babylon was terribly punished. The splendid city fortifications… were demolished... Esagila with its towering ziggurat was torn down, as were the other temples… statue of Bel Marduk… of solid gold, was carried off and melted down… priest of Esagila who protested the sacrilege was killed… estates of the merchant princes and citizens were confiscated and granted to Persians… Syria was detached from Babylon and made a fully independent satrapy. Babylonia itself lost its identity through incorporation with Assyria and was henceforth ferociously taxed" …show more content…
The empire is considered as “history’s more creative experiment in rule by tolerance” (Daisy Moore). Herodotus accounts that Xerxes burnt temples in Athens “everywhere they went, there was devastation by fire and sword and towns and temples were burnt”. However, this wasn’t because the Athenians followed different religions, but rather because of their actions “I am a friend of right, I am not a friend to wrong… who does harm, him according to do the damage thus I punish” (Naqsh-I Rustam inscription). Daisy Moore states that many different cultures of the empire were “respected by the Persians – they were free to compile their own histories, speak their own language and worship their own gods providing they paid taxes to the officials of the king, used the king’s coin and housed the king’s soldiers”. This highlights the method in which Xerxes’ ruled his empire, and his religious
Xerxes was a man of power. The Great King of Persia, his empire encompassed the majority of the known world. On his invasion of Greece in the spring of 480BCE, he reportedly commanded a horde of over two million men. Even the Greek oracle at Delphi encouraged prudence in face of such an overwhelming force (7.140). Thus the question arises of why such an army failed to compel Greece into submission. I will explore this with focus on the key battles and the important factors, most notably the timing of the attack, the quality of his expeditionary force and Xerxes’ personal faults.
...still treated equally to Muslims in respect to how the government handled vandals and thieves. By comprehending the needs of defeated Christians, Muslims were able to achieve homage with the Christians and avoid possible uprisings during military expansions of the empire.
...o the practice of other religions throughout his empire because his religion allowed for him to be a more moral and upright leader. However, Darius was a firm believer in the punishment of evil-doers. This can be seen by the inscription on the relief above the Royal Road, which stated that “The Lie made them rebellious, so that these [men] deceived the people. Afterwards Ahuramazda put them into my hand; as was my desire, so I did unto them (Primary Source, 131).” This supports the idea that Zoroastrianism, created benevolent yet firm political dignitaries.
Herodotus. “Greece Saved from Persian Conquest.” Readings in Ancient History. Eds. Nels M. Bailkey and Richard Lim. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002.
The Ancient Greeks held their religion to be a personal experience, to be practiced by the common man on a daily basis. Thus, it comes as no surprise to read in the historical works of the period that the people also relied on religion to aid them in military matters. This paper will give historical examples of the people's reliance on
When Jerusalem fell to the conquering Babylonians in 587 BC, most of what was important to the Hebrew people was gone. They lost their holy city, the Temple was destroyed, and the Davidic monarchy ended (Beasley 221). Following the destruction of Jerusalem, the Babylonian king, Nebuchadrezzar, deported most of the population to other cities, including Babylon. These exiles remained there for about fifty years until the Persian forces, under king Cyrus, took the city of Babylon in 539 BC. The Persian policies concerning captured and exiled peoples were quite different than those of the Babylonians, and because of this King Cyrus allowed the exiles to return to Jerusalem in 538 BC to rebuild the city and the Temple.
"Unhandled Exception." Ancient Greece - History, Mythology, Art, War, Culture, Society, and Architecture. 2008. Web. 27 Feb. 2011. .
Munn, Mark H. The Mother of the Gods, Athens, and the Tyranny in Asia: A Study of Sovereignty in Ancient Religion. N.p.: Berkeley: University of Califronia, 2006. Print.
The historical events are compelling on their own but Steven Pressfield creates a truly epic journey in his novel Gates of Fire. Pressfield weaves the tale of Xeones, an Akarnanian by birth, who is the lone Greek survivor of the Persian victory and the Emperor’s captive. Xeones’ boyhood home of Astakos was pillaged and burned by the traitorous city-state of Argos. Through a series of events Xeones finds his way to Sparta and becomes first the servant of Alexandros, a youth in the agoge, then battle squire to the boy’s mentor Dienekes. It is his duties as squire that bring him to Thermopylae. Throughout the novel Xeones unfolds the events of his life in a series of interviews with the Persian royal court recorded by Xerxes personal historian culminating in the last stand of the Three Hundred. It is this story telling technique that makes Gates of Fire is truly a masterpi...
guards who wanted to kill king Xerxes.(two of the eunuchs who guarded the private headquarters the had
In the years following the Persian Wars in 479 B.C., Athens had come out on top being the most dominantly powerful of any Greek city with a navy that had superior strength that increased day by day. The Athenians “ruled with heavy-handed, even brutal force as well as with reason” (Kagan 2). This was due largely to the fact that Athens had a stable and effective government, which only increased their advantage in proving themselv...
If Athens and Melos went to battle against each other, the gods, if they favored anyone, would favor Athens. We have now examined Thucydides' strongest arguments for Athenian rule. It is clear that Athens had a stronger claim to rule than the Melians had to remain sovereign. We also know that Athens' claims hold up when we examine them for validity. Thucydides beliefs in Athens' claims were therefore well founded.
Historical record is not always an accurate representation of fact. An example of this would be the long reign of the Dowager Empress Tz’u-hsi, in which there were hundreds of documents written about her life. These documents have been taken and used in the production of numerous books, especially among Western historians. It was these early historians who have established the widely accepted perspective that Tz’u-hsi hungered for power, abused it, and retained it using any means necessary. This understanding is echoed today by authors such as W.G. Sebald, author of The Rings of Saturn. There are many differences between the accounts of the Western perspective and that of Sebald’s, but the overall idea of Tz’u-Hsi as a conniving and unworthy Empress is intact between the two. Still, the investigation is not over. There happens to be an abundance of historical documentation and opinion that contradicts the Western view on Tz’u-hsi. First, Western accounts of the major issues in Tz’u-hsi’s reign will be examined; following this will be a look at how unreliable these sources are by showing their inconsistencies, where the arguments came from, and the all the other evidence supporting a different perspective on the great Empress. It is possible the Empress was everything that her enemies said she was, but the evidence at hand does not support image of a sinister Tz’u-hsi.
The greatest leaders in history often leave behind some sort of legacy. Cyrus the Great was the founder of the Persian Empire around 500 B.C., which was the largest empire of its time (Cyrus II, the Great). The empire stretched from ancient Iran, and grew to include an area reaching from Greece to India (Persian Empire). Cyrus’ reign saw some of the first contacts between Persia and Greece, and helped Persia gain the political power that had once been held by the people of Mesopotamia (Cyrus, the Great). Cyrus the Great proved to be an effective leader who developed a strong military that was stationed strategically throughout the empire to stop rebellions and keep trade routes safe, treated captives like the jews kindly, and implemented an organized administration of government that included satraps who governed locally.
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.