pothos.org

3 Modes of Persuasion Logos & Ethos:

Resolution:
"Imperium & Hegemony are paradoxes"

Due to logics; I don't want to call the Darius empire an empire but instead a hegemony, because that is a much better identification. This is a very debatable topic, of which I think many of the readers would agree that the Darius empire was a hegemony. But I am with these people who has studied thousands of years of history, I am convinced Imperialism is founded as Internal Peace & Stability. By definition does Imperialism not match the indentity of Hegemony, Imperium means realm while hegemony means the tyrannical domination over foreign regions. I propose Imperialism & hegemony are in contrast to eachother, in ancient Roman times has this already been debated that Imperialism should minimalise expansion of domain by military force.

Alexander the great said;
"I had rather excel others in the knowledge of what is excellent, than in the extent of my power & dominion."

That's what the concept of Imperialism is mostly about.

Edit:
I renamed this topic "Darius Hegemony or Empire", so you can be pro Persia and still think Darius II is a bastard !

You can make anything true by definition but Hegemony is usually defined as the leadership of a group of independent states normally a de facto rather than de iure situation viz the revolving hegemonia in Greece from Argos through Sparta to Thebes.

Imperium is a Roman term and really means the extent of a magistrate's authority and is not directly translatable as Empire. The Persian Empire was just that, there was no chance of the King of Kings being other than an Achaemenid and cannot therefore be compared to the hegemony of the Greek States, The Great King was the supreme authority divinely appointed.

Hegemony and Imperium are not paradoxical as a Roman might consider hegemonia equivalent to maius imperium.

Imperium means realm;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_romana

Hegemony means dominance over foreign regions.

Other meanings people ascribe to those words are opiniated.

Instead of looking up 'pax romana' look up Imperium and then hegemony and you will see my definitions are perfectly usual. However, I don't really want to debate English definitions with someone for whom English is not a first language, that smacks of bullying and we consider that sort of behaviour beastly in the extreme.

As it stands your paradox is that 'realm is incompatible with domination over foreign regions' this is clearly not so nor is it, I suspect what you really mean. Let us drop the terms Imperium and hegemony.

I think you mean to contrast nature of the Achaemenid Empire with that of Alexander's.

The Persian Empire established its boundaries under Darius I, permitted freedom of worship, local language, and a free rein to its satraps short of revolt even tolerating independent dynasts. Alexander imposed a Hellenistic elite suppressed local religions tolerated no gainsaying of his will indulged in quondam micro management and was constantly looking too expand his frontiers by conquest. He should have read his own propaganda more closely

agesilaos wrote:The Persian Empire established its boundaries under Darius I, permitted freedom of worship, local language, and a free rein to its satraps short of revolt even tolerating independent dynasts. Alexander imposed a Hellenistic elite suppressed local religions tolerated no gainsaying of his will indulged in quondam micro management and was constantly looking too expand his frontiers by conquest. He should have read his own propaganda more closely

Touche.

To plagiarise Whislter and Wilde:

Paralus: I wish I'd written that.

Agesilaos: You will Paralus, you will.

Phalanx Pursos wrote: But I am with these people who has studied thousands of years of history, I am convinced Imperialism is founded as Internal Peace & Stability. By definition does Imperialism not match the indentity of Hegemony, Imperium means realm while hegemony means the tyrannical domination over foreign regions.

I'm sure you'll feel differently if someone brings this imperial "peace and stability" to your doorstep.. accompanied, as always, by a giant army of course. It'll feel a lot more like tyrannical domination then... Any apologia by historians will take on a very different tinge too.