...be ruled and by whom? Like all things in the history, the ancient Greek city-states did not settle on one conclusion to this question. Instead, they devised and implemented a wide array of forms for governments over many centuries. These conclusions ranged from absolute power in possession by one person to governing powers being split amongst the masses. There were five forms of governance that were notable during the era of ancient Greece. They were the monarchy, aristocracy, tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. Some of these government types were quite akin to others, but ultimately, there was always something that each had that made them distinctive from the others....
Words: 736 - Pages: 3
...Greek, there was no center government nor empire to control the city-states. Instead, each city-state was self-governed resulting in many different format of governments. These different formats of governing developed independently in different city-states and was experimented by these entities for their success if not could be changed. This paper will compare and contrast, aristocracy, tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy as forms of government in Ancient Greek city-states. Monarchy Monarchy which is a system of governing that power is sovereignty held by a single person was not very popular in Ancient Greek but was practice by some city-states. The most popular monarchies were those of Mecedonia and Epeiros and the...
Words: 1089 - Pages: 5
...The highest position was held by two counsels. The two consuls had the authority to veto one another from gaining too much power. Within their one year term the counsel were allowed to lead the army, become judges when presented and serve Rome in foreign affairs. The monarchies had great power but also the ability of abusing this power. Polybius acknowledged the limited political freedom of this form of government and was aware of the turmoil that would occur amongst the people and their kings. This form of government was not the most suited during this...
Words: 907 - Pages: 4
...On the Disadvantages of Aristocracy Aristocracy has, in common with monarchy, the evils of an expenditure that depends on representation, the state maintaining little less pomp under aristocrats, than under princes. It is compelled to maintain itself against the phys ical superiority of numbers also, by military charges that involve heavy personal services, and large expenditures of money. Being a government of the few, it is in the main, as a necessity of human selfishness, administered in the interests of the few. The ruled are depressed in consequence of the elevation of their rulers. Information is kept within circumscribed limits, lest the mass should come to a knowledge of their force, for horses would not submit to be put in harness and made to toil for hard taskmasters, did they know as much as men. Aristocracies partaking of the irresponsible nature of corporations, are soulless, possessing neither the personal feelings that often temper even despotism, nor submitting to the human impulses of popular bodies. This is one of the worst features of an aristocracy, a system that has shown itself more ruthless than any other, though tempered by civilization, for aristocracy and barbarism cannot exist in common. As there are many masters in an aristocracy, the exactions are proportionably heavy, and this the more so, as they who impose the burthens generally find the means to evade their payment: the apophthegm that "it is better to have one tyrant than many," applying...
Words: 626 - Pages: 3
...Aristocracy (Greek ἀριστοκρατία aristokratía, from ἄριστος aristos "excellent," and κράτος kratos "power") is a form of government in which a few elite citizens rule.[1] The term derives from the Greek aristokratia, meaning "rule of the best".[2] In origin in Ancient Greece, it was conceived of as rule by the best qualified citizens, and contrasted with monarchy. In later times, aristocracy was usually seen as rule by a privileged group (the aristocratic class), and contrasted withdemocracy.[1] ------------------------------------------------- Concept The concept evolved in Ancient Greece, whereby a council of famous citizens was commonly used and contrasted with direct democracy in which a council of male citizens was appointed as their "senate". The Greeks did not like the concept of monarchy, and as their democratic system fell, aristocracy was upheld.[1] In Rome, the Republic consisted of an aristocracy as well as consuls, a senate, and a tribal assembly. Later, aristocracies primarily consisted of an elitearistocratic class, privileged by birth and often by wealth. Since the French Revolution, aristocracy has generally been contrasted with democracy, in which all citizens hold some form of political power. However this distinction is often oversimplified. In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes describes an aristocracy as a commonwealth in which the representative of the citizens is an assembly by part. Simply put, a government when only a certain part of the general public can...
Words: 3864 - Pages: 16
...troubled childhood with his Mother dying when he was aged just 6 and his Dad leaving soon after that. He and his siblings were raised by their grandparents. Young Maximilien was educated in Paris, graduating from the Lycée Louis-le-Grand and earning a law degree in 1781. He became a lawyer in his home town and lived comfortably with a moderate income. Robespierre then took on a public role, calling for political change in the French monarchy. He became a great follower of social philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, intrigued by the idea of a virtuous man who stands alone accompanied only by his conscience. He was very influenced by the enlightenment and wanted equality and freedom by a means of intellectual debate and practical demonstration. He gained a reputation for defending the poorest of society and earned the nickname "the incorruptible" for his adherence to strict moral values. At age 30, Robespierre was elected to the Estates General of the French legislature. He became increasingly popular with the people for his attacks on the French monarchy and his advocacy for democratic reforms. He also opposed the death penalty and slavery. He was very much a liberal thinker and spread (with the enlightenment) liberal views across France, particularly the third estate. Some of his colleagues saw his refusal to compromise and his rigid stand against all authority as extreme and impractical. After a time he left the legislature to push his agenda outside of government. In April 1789...
Words: 3748 - Pages: 15
...French revolution: the genesis for modern democracy French Revolution was a widespread yet profound political and social revolution. Within three years, the centuries' monarchy fell apart, the capitalism economic took over the agrarian society, and Jacobin dictatorship seized the power from Girondist. Anatole France, an 18th century French writer, discussed Jacobin’s achievements and mistakes in French revolution in the novel The Gods will have blood. The novel praised Jacobin’s revolutionary virtue spirit and its social economic policy while criticized its idolatry and abuse of violence, under France’s view, this virtue spirit are the momentum of revolution and ultimate disaster of the France. French revolution shattered the monarchy and...
Words: 999 - Pages: 4
...Polybius: "Why Romans and Not Greeks Govern the World", c. 140 BCE ________________________________________ Polybius (c. 200 - 110s BCE) was born into a prominent family in Greece and served as a leader in the Third Macedonian War against Rome. After losing to Rome in the Battle of Pydna (168 BCE), he was deported, along with 1000 other Greeks, to and held captive in Italy. Despite his status as an enemy detainee, Polybius became a friend of the family of Scipio Aemilianus, one of Rome's most remarkable and well-connected politicians. In honor of his new home and new associates, Polybius composed a history of Rome's rise to world power in the course of his own lifetime. As an outsider, Polybius may have misinterpreted Rome's imperialistic moves in the Mediterranean, and he may have exaggerated the organizational genius of the Republic and its leaders. However, his famous analysis of Rome's "mixed constitution" has influenced political thinkers for centuries, and it was standard reading in the Age of Enlightenment, when the American Constitution was created. It is important to remember, however, that the Roman Republic, unlike that of the United States, did not have a standard document that could be used as a reference; the word "constitution" in Rome's case was meant in a general, non-textual sense, as the "make-up" or "organization" of Rome's public affairs. Source: Polybius, Historiarum reliquiae (Paris: Didot, 1839), VI, iii-xvii, 338-48, passim; trans. and condensed...
Words: 2140 - Pages: 9
...Having a specific group that decides hold power within society. At least in this story, there seems to be no King or Queen to listen to the community and be the judge. Who decides who the elders get to be? is it a rigorous training, is it who you know, is it how many games of dominos that you win. Is it who has more hair, or a bigger beard, or who can recite Homer better? They have the ability and the duty to listen to appeals and to determine who in the right. Through tricks and incentives, they hope to reach the most honest and truthful answer of the parties. Even then the Greeks saw the true nature of humanity and its flaws. Far easier is it to lie and try to convince the other person to pity you than it is, to tell the truth, and stand by the consequences. The story gives vague statements in the sense of details. It remarks to the elders as a group, but at the time of the decision, it reverses itself and the elder becomes singular. The inglot's have no real owner there is no clear decision on whether it belongs to the two countrymen or the elder. The elders are described as lunging into a discussion which gives the impression of an unorganized system where everyone speaks at the same time and whoever speaks the loudest is the one...
Words: 1121 - Pages: 5
...Montesquieu: Political Philosopher and His Views and Thoughts Montesquieu: Political Philosopher and His Views and Thoughts MONTESQUIEU Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu, was born on January 19th, 1689 at La Brède, near Bordeaux, to a noble and prosperous family. He was educated at the Oratorian Collège de Juilly, received a law degree from the University of Bordeaux in 1708, and went to Paris to continue his legal studies. On the death of his father in 1713 he returned to La Brède to manage the estates he inherited, and in 1715 he married Jeanne de Lartigue, a practicing Protestant, with whom he had a son and two daughters. In 1716 he inherited from his uncle the title Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu and the office of Président à Mortier in the Parlement of Bordeaux. For the next eleven years he presided over the Tournelle, the Parlement's criminal division, in which capacity he heard legal proceedings, supervised prisons, and administered various punishments including torture. (Shklar, 1987) In 1721 Montesquieu published the Persian Letters, which was highly successful and made Montesquieu known by literary scholars. During this period he wrote several minor works: Dialogue de Sylla et d'Eucrate (1724), Réflexions sur la Monarchie Universelle (1724), and Le Temple de Gnide (1725). After visiting Italy, Germany, Austria, and other countries, he went to England, where he lived for two years. He was greatly impressed with the English political...
Words: 3854 - Pages: 16
...position of the German classes e.g. the Junker class. Ever since the early 1870’s Bismarck had felt a growing alarm at the rise of socialism within Germany and was disturbed by the progress made by the socialists in the Reichstag elections with the SPD winning half a million votes and 12 seats in 1877. He knew that the SPD would impose a tremendous threat to his aim of withholding power in the hands of aristocracy and of course himself. Beside other statesmen after the Paris Commune, Bismarck dreaded one last grasp of the socialist movement on German politics. It would have given too much power to the people. Furthermore another reason why Bismarck introduced the anti-socialistic laws was because the opportunity was provided to him with the two assassination attempts on the Kaiser in 1878. Bismarck drew no clear distinction between anarchy and socialism and therefore it is clear as to why the SPD lost support. The public alarm at the threat to the Kaiser and the newly found patriotism of the German people provided the perfect chance for Bismarck to whip up anti-socialist feeling even though both assassins had tentative links to socialism. Ultimately Bismarck’s outlook on socialism was that it provided a threat to the social stability of Germany. His own ideological views played a role with him seeing socialism as a ‘red...
Words: 515 - Pages: 3
...French Revolution, one man arose who would change the course of French and European history. This man has been called everything from a military genius and heroic soldier to a delusional dictator and paranoid executioner. Whatever one’s opinion may be, one thing is certain: Napoleon Bonaparte redefined post-Revolutionary France and, in turn, redefined the idea of what it meant to be a military dictator. To say that there was chaos and political unrest during the French Revolution is a huge understatement. After decades of oppression amidst a feudalistic society, the country peasants revolted against wealthy landowners and the aristocracy. The gap between the wealthy and powerful and those who were less fortunate was enormous, and the majority of Frenchmen would no longer tolerate living amidst poverty, hunger, and sickness while the French aristocracy lived the life of luxury off the taxes they imposed on the impoverished. After the uprising, France quickly fell into political unrest and financial disaster, with different men rising to power on nothing more than their own aspirations or “reigns of terror”, a la Robespierre. France was spinning out of control and nothing seemed to stabilize society or wield control on the population. The French were desperate for a hero, someone who would come and not only save their dying country, but also reinstate their dignity, power, and sense of national pride. Napoleon recognized himself as just the savoir France needed. He was already...
Words: 945 - Pages: 4
...French Revolution French Revolution The French Revolution played an important part in the history, not only in France but around the world. It showed that a monarchy was not the only option. The French wanted equality for everyone across the country. There was to be a stop in different classes of people and the unfair taxing of money and selling of food. Which the government was so desperate they would try to get every dime and nickel they could from the third estate. In the process of reaching their freedom, the French, had many ideas and ideals that helped shape the French Revolution War. Liberty, equality, brotherhood, hubris, fiscal irresponsibility, democracy and technology were a few of those ideas to say the least. Liberty was one of the things that the French revolutionist yearned. They were not seen as a group of people but seen has money for the government. They wanted freedom and liberty from their monarchy that they were influenced by. Monarchy in France was a king and queen that ruled all and people had no voice. They were ruled under King Louis XVI during the 10-year revolution. As they fought for their freedom from the king and queen, they had to decide where they would go after they had gained their independence. As the United States when they declared their independent from Great Britain they declared themselves a democracy. Ones the French gained their independence and overthrew the king and queen of France, and they became a republic for the people...
Words: 1207 - Pages: 5
...Writer: Mashell Chapeyama Subject: History Selected essays on Greek civilization Introduction This booklet is a collection of essays that were written for academic purpose. The essays are centred on Greece. Particular emphasis is placed on the states of Athens and Sparta. The aim of the essays is to show the contributions that Greek states made to the modern world. The world has learnt a lot of aspects from Greece, being they direct or indirect. One of the things that Greece brought to the world is the democratic system of government. Together with lessons from ancient Rome the world has learned much. Essay1: Differences in terrain and climatic conditions between Athens and Sparta Greece has many cities and towns, however probably the main ones in ancient times were Sparta and Athens. These two cities shaped the political life and history of Greece for quite a long time. The influence mainly centred on land and agriculture. For, about 90% of Greece production was agricultural in nature, with grain production as the dominant area. Incidentally, grain was a staple product and food of Greece. As a result the land that was used for grain production was a vital part of wealth and a valuable asset, for which citizens compete for. This essay is going to explore the difference in terrain between Athens and Sparta and how it affected agriculture and political rights, including democracy as well as how agricultural production had an impact on the distribution of political...
Words: 3017 - Pages: 13
...slavery, and any other notable law, document, or event that molded American into what it is today. In the document 7-1, Common Sense, January 1776, Thomas Paine makes the case for independence. Paine describes the origins of government and the structure and function of the British monarchy, he includes specific recommendations for recruiting soldiers, financing a war, and structuring a new government, and urges unity and continued armed resistance at a...
Words: 798 - Pages: 4
