| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "MONGOL EMPIRE 13TH CENTURY": |
|
|
Mongol Empire in the 13th Century, 2002.
A review of the economic and political growth of the Mongolian Empire in the 13th century.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, £ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the reasons, causes and effects of the growth of the Mongolian Empire in the 13th century. It is descriptive in character and analyzes the subject in depth.
| |
|
The Ottoman and Mongol Empires, 2008.
A comparative analysis of the influence of the Ottoman and Mongol empires on western civilization.
1,299 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 6 sources, APA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the Ottoman and Mongol empires have made their mark in history as powerful empires and how their influence extended across continents and defied the traditional Western powers. It looks at how both empires overpowered countries more established and stronger that they were while they themselves were still building their own countries. The paper also discusses how the study of their influence in Europe provides social and political scientists insights into the region's historical politics, economy and society and how these two empires have served as learning models for subsequent governments to strengthen their states as well as use the very same principles to extend their own interests in the world.
Outline:
Mongol Empire
Ottoman Empire
Comparison
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The Ottomans are credited for the foundation of modern international commerce. They also used embargoes and other trade based strategies to support their political and military agendas (Cox et al, 2001). The modern form of trade organizations and toll systems were based on Ottoman system of trafficking and controlling goods. The Ottoman's rise and decline were both prolonged ("Ottoman Empire", 2006). Some historian believe that one of the reasons for this that the Ottoman empire was not a looming military threat for any country and that it was more programmed to operate in a leisurely way and states were allowed to manage their affairs independently (Sicker, 2000). In its later years, it became more active internally with civil strife which eventfully disintegrated the empire ("Ottoman Empire", 2006)."
| |
|
The Roman Empire vs The Chinese Empire, 2001.
This paper examines the similarities and differences between the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire.
1,005 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is a detailed comparison of the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire. The author shows how the imperial dynasties of Han and Qin along with the classical empire of Rome offered their people a combination of protection against external enemies and an infrastructure that was far more functional than individual cities or regions would have been able to provide for themselves. This paper describes the reign of all three of these dynasties and their effect on their people as well as world history.
From the Paper
"While it is difficult to make any general statement that can cover the political and cultural complexities of the Roman Empire along with the Han and Qin dynasties in China because they were sufficiently different from each other as well as being possessed of substantial internal diversity. And yet, even given the range of institutions and ideals that the three cultures exemplified, there are some commonalties that strike the observer from the vantage point of the 21st century. The primary one of these is that neither the Chinese empire nor the Roman one could have extended its reach as far as it did in geographic terms, had as great a control over its subjects' personal lives as it did, nor ruled for such a long period of time had not the ruling house combined a high degree of bureaucratic efficiency with a depiction of the imperial family that was at least semi-divine."
| |
|
The Byzantine Empire: The First Christian Empire, 1986.
Overview of the rise & decline of the Byzantine Empire, the first Christian Empire. Discusses rulership of Constantine & Justinian and describes church architecture & symbolic purposes.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, £ 21.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The first Christian Empire in the world was that of the Byzantine Empire founded by Constantine in 330 A.D. The Byzantine Empire started with the division of the Roman empire into East and West factions, with the eastern provinces becoming the Byzantine Empire. When the Roman Emperor Constantine was converted to Christianity, he moved the governing center from Rome to the city of Byzantium, made Christianity the state religion, and created a state that had a profound effect on the social life and outlook of the people. The first moves toward splitting up the Roman Empire had been made by Constantine's uncle, the Emperor Diocletian, who thought that the problems with the empire were related to having too much territory to the east and north out of direct control (Wenzel, 1965: pp. 11-13). The separation did not take place immediately but over a generation or so and would last for more (...)"
| |
|
Ottoman Empire, 1999.
Background, rise & fall of empire from 13th Cent. to 19th Cent. Politics, war and culture.
2,475 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 8 sources, £ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The history of the Ottoman Empire is marked by the pursuit of traditional Islamic ideals of conquest combined with the development of an efficient centralized state capable of supporting extensive conquest and managing the administration of the empire. The gazi ethos that drove the early conquest of Anatolia and, eventually, Constantinople reached a plateau following the so-called Golden Age of S?leyman I (r. 1520-66) and subsequently faded in importance as the consolidated imperial state faced new kinds of political and economic challenges. In the course of building their vast empire the Ottomans had also developed a unique variant of Islamic society in which the state was the dominant institution. The institutions of the Ottoman state were drawn from several models and served the needs of the centralized state extremely well. But, like the gazi ideology..."
| |
|
The Mongolian Empire, 2004.
This paper analyzes the Mongolian Empire as the most successful empire in history, using the Conrad-Demarest model of empire.
1,085 words (approx. 4.3 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the Mongolian empire, which began about
1200 A.D., was selected as the best empire because its influential ideas and developments, horsemanship, militancy, nomadic lifestyle, leadership system, its fall and impact, make up all of the components needed to fully understand and appreciate the history of a great empire. The author points out that, in Khan?s military system, which was derived from the philosophy of Alexander the Great, Khan?s army integrated the commanders, bureaucrats, artisans, and professionals of the conquered peoples in order to produce new tastes in art, food, decoration, and clothing. The paper relates that the tremendous length of the Mongols? trade routes was directly related to their huge territorial domination and led, not only to the unification of the East and the West geographically, but also to cultural unification
From the Paper
"Under the rule of Genghis Khan, the Mongols started to dominate the world. He claimed power by saying that he was the ?universal ruler.? He basically used the Mandate of Heaven system of China, implying that he attained his power from God and he would be the ruler of the whole universe. This claim of Khan simply gives a clue on how he set up his ideology of ruling his state, eventually his empire. It seems like Khan?s role model was Alexander the Great and his Greek Empire. Though the Greeks did not have a militaristic social structure, they had the idea of focusing on the expansion of the territory followed by more trades and getting wealthier. This was the system Khan set up as well. He was perhaps one of the greatest military innovators in human history, and his army consisted of perhaps the best-trained horsemen in all of human history. Khan?s armies were incredibly mobile and could cover immense distances with numbing speed. Thus, it is clear that Khan established one of the major rules in rising of an empire: The tremendous military strength."
| |
|
Military Conquests of the Mongols, 2005.
Traces the conquests and expansion of the Mongol Empire from the year 1200 to about 1400 AD.
871 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The Mongolians were a nomadic, Eastern people driven into violence by necessity. Thanks to expert leadership and tactics, they formed the largest land empire in history. This paper illustrates the expansion of the Mongol Empire from 1200 to about 1400 AD. It gives descriptive accounts of crucial events and Mongolian leaders during the Empire's period of exponential growth and development.
From the Paper
"As much as the Mongols benefited from their newly obtained lands in China, they still sought more. Genghis now wanted more goods for his expanded nation, including weapons. In 1218, he sent a Mongol caravan west to the Kwarazmian Empire in Persia to help negotiate trade. In spite of the Mongols' innocuous intentions, the Kwarazmians unexpectedly accused the Mongolians of being spies and murdered the chief of the caravan. The rest were sent back to Mongolia with burnt beards, which caused them unendurable humiliation."
| |
|
The End of the Western Roman Empire, 2002.
An overview of the downfall of the Western Roman Empire through a review of Edward Gibbon's "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire".
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 10 sources, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is written about the end of the Western Roman Empire. The classic work in the field is provided by Edward Gibbon in "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". Gibbon's essential argument was one that attributed the "fall" (the use of this term today being itself a source of controversy) to "Christianity, which he claimed had undermined the ancient warrior traditions of the Romans and, through the influence of monasticism and asceticism, turned them away from earthly things".
| |
|
Jean Berenger?s "A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1273-1700", 2002.
This paper reviews Jean Berenger?s "A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1273-1700", which explains the respective weights and roles in shaping the power structure of empire.
845 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 1 source, APA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Berenger?s "A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1273-1700" that explicitly explains the colorful tapestry that is woven of the individual nations of the monarchy. The paper points out that this two-volume is a precise survey of Habsburg history from the late Baroque period to the monarchy's demise in World War I. The author believes that the information contained within the narrative has a strong overtone of politics which includes economic developments, social change and major cultural movements.
From the Paper
"Only a handful of historians have been courageous enough to attempt to centralize the diverse historical accounts of the Habsburg Empire and the people who were part of this dynasty. The cultures of those involved and the development of the fortunes is dynamic. The works of Berenger displays this information in a systematic and knowledge manner that is understandable for the reader to digest. Five centuries of Habsburg rule is dramatically scribed and holds the interest so that the reader continues to follow the historical controversy of this time. One can follow the rulers of Spain and the Netherlands and understand how the head of the Holy Roman Empire was also a de facto family possession."
| |
|
Introduction to the Ottoman Empire, 2005.
A historical overview of one of the most fascinating periods in the history of civilization, the era of the Ottoman empire.
3,301 words (approx. 13.2 pages), 14 sources, APA, £ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a thorough overview of the history of the Ottoman Empire and the impact it had on the world. The paper describes the early structure of the empire's political and military might, the Ottoman empire's gradual demise and its final collapse.
The Early Structure of Political and Military Power
in the Ottoman Empire
Turkish Military: The First Place the Turks Occupied in Europe was
Gallipoli
The Growth and Expansion of Russia from the 18th Century Onwards
Egypt (because of cotton) Begins a Move Away
from the Ottoman Empire
Demands Pressed Upon the Ottoman State - and Russian Expansion -
Led to a Further Weakening of Ottoman
The Janissary Corps
The Ottoman Failure to Reform the Inefficient System of
Government they were Using
The Origin and Decline of the Ottoman Empire
From the Paper
"And it is important to note that Turkey's domination over Africa's northern areas was not entirely well defined, and the Ottoman Empire did not really have permanent, clear-cut borders; rather, the empire was more of a military administration over a vast region of diverse cultures and geography."
| |
|
The Roman Empire, 2006.
A review of the Roman empire and a discussion as to why Rome, which began as a city-state, was so much more successful than Athens in creating and maintaining an empire.
1,034 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the structure of the Roman empire during the time period known as the principate. The paper reviews how the Romans governed their provinces, what methods were used to secure and protect them, the taxation policies, ways in which Roman ideology and values were impressed upon subjugated peoples, and how the Romans exploited the natural and human resources of their conquests.
Outline:
Introduction
The Principate
Rome over Athens?
From the Paper
"The Romans imposed their ideology and value system upon conquered peoples through a long process of assimilation that generally took many years, if not several generations. The assimilation naturally begins with the conquest of a nation or territory by the Legions. In the fighting, many native warriors are killed, particularly any leaders or nobility that opposed the Romans. After the conquest, Rome appointed governors to rule the territory that were amicable to Roman rule, and often were native leaders that welcomed Roman influence in their homelands (usually for personal gain). Roman soldiers would settle in the new province, furthering the assimilation process by interbreeding with the native peoples. Roman temples were built to replace domestic religious sites. Young warriors would join the Roman army, which would serve to indoctrinate them into Roman culture and ways, including the use of Latin as a language- one of the rewards of military service was full Roman citizenship. Over the years, these factors would slowly change the native cultures until almost no vestiges of the original culture remained, and the people were living by Roman laws and customs. This assimilation process came to be known as "Romanization." [3]"
| |
|
Fall of the Ottoman Empire, 2008.
A discussion of the factors surrounding the fall of the Ottoman empire.
2,375 words (approx. 9.5 pages), 8 sources, MLA, £ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses the gradual decline of the Ottoman Empire as a result of many mitigating factors, centralized and weak power in the ineffectual sultanate, nepotism, capitulations, military weaknesses, economic crisis and opposing European development and strength. The paper points out that the empire, which had been marked by extreme pluralism and demonstrative social order, in the face of massive variances of culture and economies in a huge empire faced internal and external strife that eventually toppled it. The development of the Ottoman Empire, which had begun under the auspices of economic power, was demonstrated in technological development and place-based economics, as well as social and religious tolerance. The paper concludes that, ultimately, the Ottoman empire fell because these progressive ideals were disseminated into a culture that demanded adherence to traditions that were archaic and contrary to continued economic and social development.
From the Paper
"European trade agreements were not an unusual economic situation in the Ottoman empire. Many in fact date back to the beginning of centralized development. As a mater of rational congress, individual and state sponsored cooperation was offered to European entities to facilitate profit and the export of goods that were thought essential to Europe and therefore Europeans and their traders were willing to pay well for. One clear example of this is the age old spice trade that could not reach Europe without some transgression across Ottoman lands. (Goffman 181) (Sicker 10) (Barsoumian 174) To some degree the centralization of power also demanded the continued centralization of economic dominance, by the state, so these age old compromises and pacts that were the development of regional propriety began to be seen by the central government as in need of its own official stamp. So, as an extension of the egalitarian manner in which individual principalities and faiths were allowed relative independence the state created trade capitulations to further develop European trade control."
| |
|
The Impact of the British Empire upon Britain, 1983.
This paper discusses the British Empire from social, political and cultural perspectives, describes the scope in terms of land and power of the Empire and examines some of the negative aspects of Imperialism.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 7 sources, £ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The British Empire was the greatest political entity known to human history. At its height it embraced much of Africa, all of the Indian subcontinent, the continent of Australia and much of the immense archipelago that links it to Southeast Asia, much of North America, not to mention numerous small but important territories scattered around the world. In addition, of course, it embraced the British Isles themselves. It ruled about a third of the world's people and perhaps half its wealth. For five generations ... "
| |
|
Is the United States an Empire?, 2008.
An argument that the United States is changing from a republic into an empire.
2,095 words (approx. 8.4 pages), 4 sources, APA, £ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines whether the United States could be considered an hegemonic power or even an empire. It discusses the effect of the United States on the world and suggests that a world without strong U.S. leadership would be less peaceful, less stable, and less prosperous. The paper then argues that the United States in the present is one that is hurling the republic toward becoming an empire.
Table of Contents:
Statement of Thesis
The American Empire
A Momentous Departure from Previous US Policy
Elements of an Empire Defined
Realism and Restraint
Summary and Conclusion
From the Paper
"This appears to be what has happened in relation to the United States involvement in the war in Iraq, as every American is able to see that removal of U.S. troops is the preferable choice, and yet due to pathway dependence this is not likely to occur. Additionally, with war drums now reverberating from the country of Iran who insists that it is gaining nuclear abilities the expansion of the empire of the United States will likely be forced, due to pathway dependency to march forward into yet another war with the country of Iran, unless Iran bows to the will of the United States. The better-chosen path for the Untied States in the situation with Iraq would certainly have been based upon the realism policy of containment however, it does appear to be far too late to make that reversal."
|
|
|
