First Empire In History

Originally posted by konstantinius Originally posted by Khashayarshah Originally posted by konstantinius Absolutely not. The Sumer/Akkad Empire and then the first Assyrian Empire were definetely before the Achaemenids. Then, we have the Hittite Empire and that of NK Egypt that extended up to the Lebanese coast. The first WORLD EMPIRE my friend. What is that supposed to mean? Did the Persian Empire extend to China or Africa? What is a "world empire", what are its limits and how did it differ from its previous empires?

Sorry to jump in here Cyrus :)

Correct me if I am wrong... Achamenid Persia was the world's first super power, the mightiest empire to ever exist up until that point in time and ruled the majority of the known world.

The Achaemenids where indeed,as far as i know,the first Empire with people of many different ethnicities as it's subjects.

In my opinion the term "barbarian" was used by Ancient Hellens in a political sense ,not a biological one,meaning that Ancient Hellens considered themselves to have superior political systems in their city-States,the heartstone of the Ancient Hellenic World.Ancient Hellens were highly nativists and considered the rule of one Monarch quite bearish (e.g. Persia).That's why ,the main difference between the two Ancient Worlds ,according to Ancient Hellen writers,was that Persians were ruled by one despotic King while Hellens were free men.

Edited by Spartakus - 09-Jan-2007 at 13:28

Originally posted by Spartakus In my opinion the term "barbarian" was used by Ancient Hellens in a political sense ,not a biological one,meaning that Ancient Hellens considered themselves to have superior political systems in their city-States,the heartstone of the Ancient Hellenic World.Ancient Hellens were highly nativists and considered the rule of one Monarch quite bearish (e.g. Persia).That's why ,the main difference between the two Ancient Worlds ,according to Ancient Hellen writers,was that Persians were ruled by one despotic King while Hellens were free men.

Thats incorrect because Many of the city states had kings too, just like Persia, and generally, rule in the Greek city states was much more authoritarian and intolerant than the rule in Persia.

Also, regarding the question of the topic, we have to first distinguish between kingdoms and empires.

I dont believe Egypt or the hitites or the sumerians, or elamites, were empires, they were kingdoms...

However, Assyria and babylon could be considered empires.


Edited by TheGame - 09-Jan-2007 at 17:17

I mentioned what Ancient Hellens believed .Concerning their respect to the King,i believe they respected the power of the King,not the King's political constitution.That's why they fight against Persians in the first place.The Persian international system of goverment may was good for Persia,but not nessecarily for Ancient Hellas.

Most city states had a type of oligarchy,a few democracy,a few tyranny,and much fewer a king.Most City- States had mixed govermental types,oligarchy-democracy.Hell,the only Ancient Hellenic kingdom i know,if you consider it Hellenic,it's that of Macedonia.


Edited by Spartakus - 10-Jan-2007 at 02:33

Originally posted by Spartakus In my opinion the term "barbarian" was used by Ancient Hellens in a political sense ,not a biological one,meaning that Ancient Hellens considered themselves to have superior political systems in their city-States,the heartstone of the Ancient Hellenic World.Ancient Hellens were highly nativists and considered the rule of one Monarch quite bearish (e.g. Persia).That's why ,the main difference between the two Ancient Worlds ,according to Ancient Hellen writers,was that Persians were ruled by one despotic King while Hellens were free men.

I can see where you are coming from Spartakus. The Ancient Greeks - not neccesarily ALL of them - saw themselves as culturally superior to everyone else. They just believed that their traditions, lifestyle, religion and society was more advanced...