1 of 1

Write now Article Tools

In Ancient Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt the kings ruled in very different ways. Although the kings of both lands were closely tied to religious institutions they had very different responsibilities to their subjects because of the culture of these areas. In Egypt, a cultural belief in Ma'at, a religious concept of universal harmony and repetition cause the kings to act very differently then the kings of Mesopotamia who have to satisfy the feelings of expansionism caused by their geographic location. These differences are best seen in the way these kings handled cultural development, keeping the support of the people, and even the life expectancy of the kings themselves.

Because Mesopotamia is so centrally located it is constantly surrounded by other cultural impute. Different languages, ethnicities, and material culture floated around the Near East and were constantly influencing and changing the people of Mesopotamia. This means that kings had to develop attitudes of expansionism and cultural adaptability if they wanted to have an empire. Sumerian and Akkadian kings regularly controlling or were controlled by groups of non-Semitic people. This means that these kings had to act in ways that inflicted their own culture on others or adapt to the culture of other groups constantly. This cultural melding would eventually make it harder for empires to meet the needs of the various peoples in it and thus made empire itself harder to maintain. The Expansionist nature of these kings is very different from the Egyptian ideas of Ma'at. The Egyptians had no need to expand outside of the Nile Valley which was the most productive area in the Ancient Near East, and instead developed a more uniform culture of cycles that were naturally harmonious within their own kingdom. They called this balance Ma'at. They were much more interested in the balance of their own realm then gaining new territories. This means that the kings tended away from expansionist ideals and instead concentrated on internal policy. This lead to periods were hundreds of years would pass with genuine progress and constant levels of prosperity, but at the same time would erode the central power of the Pharos (Stiebing 130).
Another example of the difference between kings was the way they kept the support of the people. In Mesopotamia, at first, support for a king came from military victories and an ability to unite warring states. As time progressed they also gain legitimacy from internal

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia: A contrast in royal ruling styles?
We want to hear your view. Write now!