All payments went towards the king, this would've also made the Earls not feel powerful enough, especially Harold Godwin who was seen as the most powerful man in England, but theoretically he wasn’t. However the Economy was well governed because the trade increased, which encouraged both the growth of towns and foreign contacts, this demonstrates that England were still involved in trade, which was good for the economy. However the economy was not very well developed especially compared to the Byzantine Empire and Muslim world. Those economies were massive, especially when compared to England’s. Overall I believe that the economy for pre-Conquest England as well- governed to an extent as the King did have large control, he did control this well, but he may have been seen as too powerful where the government is concerned.
Because of their right-wing standing, it meant that businesses would always favour their service rather than that of the left-wing Republicans, as the Republican ideals would pave the way for more intimidating economic circumstances. Likewise, the elite of Spain’s army naturally gravitated towards the generals that took the side of the Nationalists. Additionally, their right-wing standing meant that they also had the attention and favour of the fascist states of Germany and Italy. These were powerful allies for the Nationalists to have; they provided them with many additional ground troops and air superiority, both of which would prove to be of great assistance in the war. This air force was superior due to the Republicans not having particularly impressive air power at all – this too was inevitable, as the only country willing to provide support for the Republicans was the USSR, whose support was not nearly as impressive.
Another reason America had an advantage over Britain was that the English citizens were tired of war. The war had begun to turn into years and citizens were getting tired of paying taxes and just the war in general. In my opinion one of the biggest advantages the colonists had was how great a leader George Washington was. American soldiers were outnumbered and not as well trained as the English soldiers, but because of Washington’s brilliance and strategy it helped the colonists prevail over Britain. On the other hand Britain also had many advantages over the Americans.
The legacy of the empire is still around today by the new Iranian architecture, the Persian traditions, and the start of direct trade to Europe. Although considered one of the greatest empires of its time the Safavid Empire was also the shortest lived, the strengths within the empire allowed for the fast growth because of strong leaders that rose to power and their use of international trade, while the weaknesses lead to the quick demise of the empire because of the lack of strong leaders and their inability to control the ethnic groups that inhabited the nation. The strong leaders that rose to power at the beginning of the Safavid Empire enabled them to prosper because their strategic and tactical decisions allowed them to contest against other empires. Leaders such as Shah Ishmael, who was the founder of the Safavid Empire, and Shah Abbas, were of the few leaders that drove the empire to power during their existence. They were able to do this by their ability to motivate their troops
With each level of this hierarchy had its own leader. For example the sheriffs managed the shires under the Earls. This system shows that there was a very clear peaking order in pre- conquest England; this would have made the country a lot easier to manage because each division of land had a local lord to manage it. However, the power of the Earls was one of the issues that this system had. When the Earls combined their power it was enough to overpower the King, this meant that if they worked together they would be able to overcome him without an issue at all.
Both dynasties made many great advancements, ecological and technological. The governments, however, had their own ways of maintain the political control over their regions. The Han Dynasty and Imperial Rome methods for maintaining political control were similar in many ways, such as their uses of the military and their centralized governments. They do this because it makes the most logical sense and is one of the more simplistic, yet efficient ways to keep society in check. The two dynasties are also quite different in many ways, including the roles of the citizens and the governments ways
This similarity shows that, though neither civilization was dependent on it, land trade played an important role in the cultures of the two civilizations. These trade roads also played a large part in the cultural diffusion of Rome and Latin America. In Classical Latin America and the early years of Classic Rome, Mountainous terrain isolated cities, towns, and villages, but through the complex trade routes, these two civilizations could interact with their surrounding civilizations. Another similarity between the two cultures was that the Aztecs, a classical civilization of Latin America, and the Romans both conquered new territory for either political or economic reasons. With Rome conquering Western Europe and the Aztecs conquering the majority of Central America, the two civilizations gathered a large amount of wealth from the conquered states.
Royal authority was developed to organize the resources and manpower to construct underground irrigation channels. This type of government was used for the duration of the Persian Empire. The Greek culture, however, came into being only because of trade with foreign peoples. They were located on lands surrounding the Mediterranean Sea, and thus used the broad expanse of water to transport people and goods faster and cheaper. The sea also exposed early Greeks to foreign cultures.
And waste could be easily disposed of because f the relatively small amount. The problems Rome started to encounter were that the demands of their massive empire were greater then what the area could provide, so they were forced to look further for water, food, and ways to get rid of their waste. This forced innovations such as sewers, aqueducts and roads. Roman Ingenuity created techniques and materials that are still being used today, by almost all cultures. They invented the first evolution of cements, which enabled architecture and engineering to advance leaps and bounds over previous cultures and styles of building.
Some historians may argue that the Caesar’s expansion of Rome was dangerous, but the lands he gained actually served as defensive buffer zones (Source 1). Rome was protected by these lands for many more centuries after his time. As dictator, Caesar had a duty to improve the status of Rome. He did this extremely well by making improvements in the political system. According to Source 3, “He limited the terms of