Alexander ZubarevChapter IV outline.The Persians were developing in the Middle East, while Greeks were developing in Europe. After the Greek decline, the Romans would take control. The Persians developed a religion (Zoroastrianism), and advanced iron working. The book covers Persian empire very briefly, for some reason.While the Persian Empire steadily developed, Greece was slowly gathering strength. From 800 to 600 B.C, strong city-states started to take hold in Greece. Some of the governments that ancient Greeks had were: oligarchy and monarchy, as well as some republics. This was good, since all of these governments had certain strengths and weaknesses, and Greeks took advantage of ea ...view middle of the document...
They were later destined to use this tactic on a world scale. When Romans had a trading rival: Carthage, three Punic Wars would eventually result. During the 1st Punic War, the Romans drew the Carthaginians out of present-day Spain. During the 2nd Punic War, a brilliant Carthaginian general arose, by the name of Hannibal. Hannibal crossed the Alps and struck the Romans in the north, where they at least expected it. Enjoying a victory after victory, Hannibal and his men approached Rome itself. When Hannibal asked for reinforcements, he was denied. This was Rome's lucky day. Then, Romans launched a desperate counter-attack to Africa, and Hannibal was ordered back to Carthage. There he got beaten in the battle of Zama. After the battle of Zama, the 3rd Punic war began. The Romans destroyed Carthage and spread salt on the ground so that nothing grows there. Most importantly, the Romans made their own addition to the Bible after they captured the holy Palestinian land. Romans also colonized Britain, and Julius Caesar conquered Gaul, modern France's territory. After that, Caesar attempted to conquer Germany, although it was the hardest of them all. Julius Caesar actually admired the simple culture of the Germans, who actually would later invade the empire and make it fall.Then happened what I personally believe to be one of the saddest periods in history--Julius Caesar was assassinated by a group of conspirators led by Cassius and Marcus Brutus (credit to William Shakespeare). But Caesar's nephew, Marcus Antonius, avenged the conspirators, and led some campaigns of his own. He pretty much finished off Spain and eliminated all other partisan resistance in the empire. The question that I and probably some historians have is: "What if Caesar wasn't assassinated?" Would the fall of Rome be delayed for a couple of decades? If so, would it change history? We'll never know...The fall of the Roman Empire lasted 250 years, and the Huns overturned the government in 476 A.D. Some emperors such as Diocletian and Constantine attempted to bring the Roman Empire back to its original form. Constantine even converted to Christianity, and interestingly enough, the fall of Rome contributed largely to the development of what is known today as one of the world's major religions. Romans had to rely heavily on mercenaries, or hired foreign soldiers, and their loyalty was mediocre at best. After the fall of the Roman Empire, there were ultimately 2 empires: The Holy Roman Empire (established in the 15th century A.D, I think), which had the Western half of the Roman Empire, and the Byzantine Empire, who controlled the East...
