1. self-efficate, politically homogenous citizen leaders
2. powerful miltary capable of hegemonic control and occupation
3. Jewish bankers and financiers
4. strong industrial/manufacturing base
5. social tolerance and liberalism
6. ample land and natural resources
7. ample food and entertainment outlets for the masses
8. religious tolerance/plurality
9. entrepreneurial-friendly economy
10. effective balance of power at the highest levels of government
2006-11-29 05:54:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Super G 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not sure I can get 10, but I'll start with:-
1. Stability at home - the masters don't want to be continually looking over their shoulders.
2. An effective army
3. An effective bureaucracy
4. A willingness to bend slightly. The Romans were so successful in part because they allowed local customs and did not ride roughshod over the subject peoples, so much so that the leaders of those subject peoples wanted to become Romans themselves.
5. Decent communications - as the Roman or Persian roads, way stations etc., to allow the centre to know rapidly what is happening in far flung corners of the Empire.
6. A caste of persons who are prepared to leave home and set up a new life in the Empire and become its administrators
There's 6 to be getting on with
2006-11-29 13:53:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by rdenig_male 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hey wildchild...,
The first is a strong Emperor!
Scholars debate what exactly constitutes an Empire (from the Latin "imperium", denoting military command within the ancient Roman government). Generally, they may define an empire as a state that extends dominion over areas and populations distinct culturally and ethnically from the culture/ethnicity at the center of power. Like other states, an empire maintains its political structure at least partly by coercion. Land-based empires (such as the Mongol Empire or the Achaemenid Persia) tend to extend in a contiguous area; sea-borne empires, also known as thalassocracies (the Athenian and British empires provide examples), may feature looser structures and more scattered territories.
Empires predate the Romans by several hundred years: Egypt, for example, set up an empire in the 16th century BC by invading and then incorporating Nubia and the ancient city-states of the Levant. The Akkadian Empire of Sargon of Akkad exists as one of the earliest models of a far-flung, land-based empire. Empire contrasts with the example of a federation, where a large, multi-ethnic state — or even an ethnically homogeneous one like Japan or a small area like Switzerland — relies on mutual agreement amongst its component political units which retain a high degree of autonomy. Additionally, one can compare physical empires with potentially more abstract or less formally structured hegemonies, in which the sphere of influence of a single political unit (such as a city-state) dominates a culturally unified area politically or militarily. A second side of this same coin shows in potentially inherent tactics of divide and conquer by different factions ("the enemy of my enemy is my friend") and central intervention for the greater whole's benefit.
2006-11-29 13:49:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by BuyTheSeaProperty 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Army, money, looting, political will, technology,
colons, culture, women and children. The tenth is religion. Did you notice I just described America ?
2006-11-29 13:53:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mimi 5
·
0⤊
0⤋