How did Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values?

How did Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values?

Postby young-nam » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:51 pm

PLEASE if you could reply to bullets below to answer question above. Thank you.

• Persians-Imperial political system built upon previous societies-Babylonian/Assyrian
• Large geographic area-Egypt to India/35 million subjects
• Cult of Kingship
• Absolute rule
• Administrative system-Satrap-twenty-three provinces/local leaders
• Policy of respect for the conquered
• Greeks-Political organization(?)- hundreds of independent city-states each with 500-5000 male citizens/not an empire/colonies around the Mediterranean and Black Sea
• Culture of popular participation based on the ideas of citizenship-starts from wealthy to the lower classes
• Athens most democratic-Solon-end of Aristocratic rule/debt slavery/extends citizenship/paid-still half of population left out
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:31 pm

How did Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values?

Postby mannix26 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:52 pm

Both were very similar in a lot of respects:
>both were heavily into Gods and rituals
>both very strong and intellegent armies
>The greeks favoured education above most other things..very comon for boys to have high educations
>greeks were great inventors and did a lot of construction
>persians were great with surprise attacks
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:00 pm

How did Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values?

Postby rodrick23 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:54 pm

The Persians tended to build great empires with provinces ruled by satraps, under a single great ruler--shahanshah or king of kings. The Greeks, in contrast, favored independent city states with no overlord. Many disliked Alexander the great's attempt to unify them. After the battle of Cynocephale, when Rome ended Macedonian rule over Greece, the Greeks were overjoyed--until Rome became their new master.
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:56 am

How did Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values?

Postby marise37 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:56 pm

at first, persians never had really powerful and trained armies because of many proofs, they could not defeat greeks (while they were scattered and ununified) even with an army of 1000000 soldiers! the conditions remained same forever:
why cyrus and his whole army got wiped out by masaget turkish raiders in central asia?
why alexander the great could capture whole persia with only 40000 professional soldiers?
why sasanid armies got defeated by turkish khanats many times?
why persia fell like a stone when some nomadic poorly armed and outnumbered arabs attacked them?
why 250000 mongols were enough to capture whole persia while persians had double of that quantify of soldiers only in khorasan? while not even one mongol soldier could escape from egypt's mamluks (which were turkish soldiers again) ?

persians were only successful raiders as long as they had no strong enemies, that is the fact.

and that is true of their superiority using surprise attackes, tell you why, because it was their method to give someone promises of peace and safety and after they made a trust and laid down their defenses persians attacked them by surprise! this way of gaining victory is called betrayal and back stabbing. they did so in many occasions.

as another example, king leonidas, a true hero said to xerxes that "we are fighting for our honor while you are fighting to gain wealth and gold!", xerxes answered "well people always are after what they dont have!".

about persian's religion and belief, their religion was zartoshtism, some kind of shamanism, worshiping the fire and deamonic spirits, some of their most interesting traditions were that commoners did not have the right to get educations, marrying with their own sisters was so popular, they even have myths about love between brother and sisters, one of those tales is the take of "wisse and ramin"!. their most important religious task was to keep the holy fire burning.

after arab's attack into persia, persians got converted into islam very quickly and without seriose complainings mostly because of the zartoshtism's absurd laws and traditions, many persians joined arab's (called mavali) and fought along side them with few reluctanses against arab khalifats, like turkish ones in azerbaijan which arabs only could crash them with persian's provided information, later again another turk called babak made a rebellion against islamic khalifat and fought muslim armies for 20 years but a persian called afshin betrayed him and caused his defeat.
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 11:04 pm

How did Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values?

Postby weston8 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:58 pm

Don't listen to Rebelioner, he's a ugly uneducated Turk who is trying to spread lies about Persians, let me correct him.

First of all no ancient army has EVER had 1 000 000 soldiers in one battle.

Cyrus defeated 2/3 of the civilized world at that time, and the massagates weren't turks they were an
Northeastern Iranian people similar to the Scythians

Because Darius III was a bad general and the Persians were already dealing with the revolting Egyptians, Babylonians and Scythians in that time.

About the arabs, they weren't poorly armed. And they lost because they had a 200 years war with the Byzantine/Roman empire which left them exhausted after the war and they had no time to recover.

The Mongols didn't attack Persia, they attacked the Khawzerms (Tajikistan and Afghanistan), but the Persians from Esfahan were able to hold them off.

And the tactics of the Persians rebelioner is talking about is all lies. Aswell as the quote he said.

Zoroastrianism is a religion based on Good thoughts, good words and good deads not demonic, unlike the religions of the Turks islam which is all about stong and torturing women.

The Persians NEVER converted to Islam all the Zoroastrians were killed, and everyone were forced to worship Islam. AZERBAIJAN was not Turkish PROOF: AZARABADEGAN means FIRE KEEPER IN MIDDLE PERSIAN which proves that it was a Iranian city. Babak Khorramdin was 100% PERSIAN and not TURKISH, HE WAS BORN IN THE PERSIAN PROVINCE AZARABADEGAN WHICH WASNT TURKISH. He was a Zoroastrian and his last name was ''Khorramdin'' which means peaceful/happy person. And also Babak is a Persian name that originated from the founders of the Sassanid Empire.

This means that you're jealous of Persian history and that's why you try to steal it Haha good one

This is the language that they spoke:

It's Iranian you dumbass.

Rebelioner is a Persian hating Turk who is spreading hate and lies about Persians just because he probably got dumped by a Persian girl

Or beat up bad by a Persian Guy, He always runs away when I get into a argument with him, typical Turks.

He says he's telling the truth but all he does is lying and stepping away because he doesn't have anything to respond.

The Persians were very friendly and fair, the Empires they defeated could keep their religion and traditions, unlike the Turks/Mongols and Arabs, when they captured a empire they burned all houses, enslaved women, killed all men/children.

Oh and the Persians also liberated the Jews from babylonian captivity. And This Turk also mentions that Persians only fought weak empires, Please.

We defeated:

Gökturks (Turks)
Ottoman Turks

And many many more.

Those empires were NOT weak!

The Persians were outnumbered in almost every battle but won with decisive victories
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 3:10 pm

Return to Debt Management


  • Related topics
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests