The archaic Athena period saw the leadership bestowed on rulers and the subject did not have a chance to air their grievances. The army was supposed to force people into obeying what the rulers thought to be right and ought to be followed by their subjects. States that did not support or join Athens were conquered, and at times were burnt down to ashes. The war captives were sold to slavery to provide wealth to the state and the ruling class. The classical period saw a change in leadership in Athena and Greece as a whole. Democracy was introduced in running government affairs where people would elect representatives to the senate (Davies 103). Cities would discuss issues and not conquer the weak members of the state. The stoppage of conquest war saw growth of existing cities without fear of attack. The classical period in Greece saw a friendly means of interaction between the government and the subjects that was different with the case in old civilizations like Egypt.
The Egyptians had a leadership that put the Pharaohs as the leader of the monarchy. Pharaohs were seen as gods and any of their orders were regarded as laws. The wives of the rulers took part in leadership and were seen to be the second most powerful people in the state. Egypt like Greece grew on conquering its neighbor while acquiring slaves to work on tombs and farms. The slaves in Egypt were not paid and at times were not even allowed to marry among themselves.
The Egyptian form of government did not provide for any form of democracy where the subjects could air their grievances. This was different from the Greece leadership which developed a senate during the classical period to involve the subjects in ruling. Greece during the classical period provided for communal meetings in major cities like Athens where people would air their grievances to their leaders. In Egypt, any form of grievances aired by the subject would be seen as a form of challenging the sole leadership of pharaohs.
The Egyptians and the Greece people had a similarity in leadership where religion played a great role in the leadership. The Egyptians had to consult with gods to gain favors before going to war. Leaders ruled the people believing that they were carrying out the will of god and disobeying them amounted to breaking the rules of the gods. The belief in gods and goddess did not change during the classical period in Greece where cities had multiple gods to whom they offered sacrifices.
The ruling class controlled taxation in the classical Greece period. Tax collectors had a way of keeping records through pictorial form of writing. The Greece leadership allowed people to approve any form of the taxes while the Egyptian government the rulers introduced taxes at their own will without consulting with the subjects. The taxes in archaic Egypt were collected using force and people were sometime forced to provide labor without pay to settle their arrears in taxes (Author 46). People in classical Athens resisted taxes through airing their grievances in Senate and meetings held in cities. The government in Greece was accountable to the way taxes were spent while the Egyptian pharaohs did not account on the spending of the taxes. The taxes were used to construct luxurious homes and tombs for the Pharaohs.
The Mesopotamia leadership had less attachment to religion while taxes were levied on subjects, as was the case in Greece and Egypt. The leadership was in the form of a dynasty where kings held to the leadership of the country. The leadership was hereditary where a single family had the powers of ruling the country. The early periods saw Mesopotamia rise as independent cities fought each other. Cities fought to gain leadership over each other and at sometimes took slave from neighbors. The powerful cities ruled over their neighbors levying taxes on them. The cities unified into a dynasty after a long time of fighting among themselves eventually providing one strong block. The one block did not provide efficient leadership as was in classical Greece because the nobles continued to hold onto power. The rulers did not form a governing council which would represent the will people like the senate during classical Greece (Mead 146).
The archaic period in Greece saw stronger cities conquering their neighbors. The conquest was informed by the need of a strong city to show their military prowess together with need of earning taxes from them. The conquest war led to destruction of cities and massive loss of lives where at some point cities were burnt down together with their inhabitants. The classical period saw cities begin developing agreements among themselves to provide peaceful solutions to wars.
Concisely, the classical Greece has made multiple contributions to the modern civilization and democracy (Davies 102). The accountability in government in Greece saw people support their government with less resistant compared to monarchies like Egypt and Mesopotamia. The leadership in classical Greece led to development of a writing system that would be used in preserving records on taxation and government policies.
Works Cited
Davies, John. Democracy and classical Greece. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1993. Print.
Mead, Charles. Old civilizations of Inca land. San Diego, CA: Book Tree, 2002. Print.
