Comparison Between the Inca Government and American Government
Essay Preview: Comparison Between the Inca Government and American Government
Report this essay
The ancient Inca government and the government of the United States of America have some things in common; while at the same time both very different. The powers possessed by the Inca monarch are similar to those of the U.S. government. However, Inca punishments for criminals are very different from American punishments for criminals. The Inca government had a very strong structure, which enabled it to last for hundreds of years. One major distinction between the two governments though, is that the Inca government was invaded about two hundred years before the U.S. government was founded.
The powers possessed by the Inca monarch are similar to those that are exercised by the entire U.S. government. The Inca monarch had complete control of his kingdom and exercised legislative, judicial and executive power. On the other hand, the U. S. government is divided into three different sections, the judicial branch, legislative branch and the executive branch. In the U.S. each branch is held in check by each of the other branches so that, even though they are separate, they will not collapse. Formations of good, stable governments can still work though it differs from country to country, as seen in the U.S. and Inca governments.
Though both governments possessed the judicial power, they used this power very differently. In the America when someone commits a crime they usually have a trial to determine their guilt. If they are found guilty, then they are usually put in jail for an extended period. On the other hand, the Inca form of punishment for a crime was drastically different. The common Inca punishment was to Ðbreak a criminals back by dropping a heavy stone on it. Shown by these two governments, one power can be exercised in two completely different ways by two very different stable governments.
The Inca government had a very solid structure, which enabled it to last for the long length that it did. Similarly, the U.S. government has also lasted for a while, since it was created. Absolute power, similar to the power had by the Inca monarch, while it may seem good, can at the same time appear bad. Absolute power of a kingdom is not healthy for one man to possess alone. In this respect, the structure of the U.S. government is much better, because the power is divided into three branches. In addition, the form of punishing criminals in the U.S.A. is better because it is more humane.
As seen by the previous examples, the U.S. government and the Inca government are quite contrastable. Besides the three powers of government possessed by both, they have virtually nothing else in common. Though the Inca government was exceptionally good and held out for quite a time, the U.S. government seems better. This is because the Inca government has collapsed as a result of invaders, while the U. S, government is still running.
The impressive funerary monuments erected by the early rulers were surrounded since the beginning of the Early Dynastic Period by the tombs of their families and followers. In the Old Kingdom, all key administrative posts were held by members of the royal family. At their deaths, beautiful carved and painted mastabas were constructed for them in the cemeteries of Giza and Saqqara.
In theory the king was the only landholder, the only priest, the only judge and the only warrior, in ancient Egypt. In practice, he surrounded himself with ministers and officials who worked under the supervision of the vizier. Kings shown on palettes and maceheads, and on tomb paintings and reliefs, are always depicted attended by servants and courtiers.
An individual designated as tjt was depicted on both the Narmer Palette and Narmer macehead, standing and walking in front of the king carrying what appears to be an item of royal regalia. This may have been the precursor of the later tjaty, or vizier. (see below)
The sign of a cylinder or rectangular seal suspended on a cord was the earliest hieroglyphic sign used for the title “Keeper of the Royal Seal.” One of the earliest men who held this title was Hemaka, who served King Den in the 1st Dynasty. His Saqqara tomb rivals that of the king himself, and the finds from the tomb comprise the largest single collection of material from the period, including the earliest example of papyrus (albeit the scroll was unused). Hemaka also claimed the title of “Ruling in the Kings heart.”
The earliest attested title connected with the treasury is an official of the white house, heri per-hedj, early in the reign of King Den. In the 3rd Dynasty, the official was the overseer, or imy-ra per-hedj, a title borne by Nefer, Meri, and Pehernefer, who also held three other titles connected with the treasury, and was overseer of the granaries. The White House and the Red house, per-hedj and per-desher, functioned as the state treasury, and the produce received was used to pay officials, craftsmen, retainers, and perhaps also as donations to local temples and funerary cult complexes.
The title of imy-ra, or overseer, was used by every senior or middle-ranking official in every level of the administration. One such title was “Overseer of the Double House of Silver,” that is, the Treasurer of all Egypt. The Royal Steward was actually the “Overseer of the Kings House.”
Those officials whose duties put them in closest contact with the king claimed to be “Known to the King,” often translated as Royal Acquaintance. Both men and women proudly held by both men and women.
By the reign of Sneferu, first king of the great pyramid age in the 4th dynasty, Egypt was in a rising tide of prosperity. Constructional techniques in building pyramids were increasing rapidly, and statuary and relief production soared. This was all made possible by strong centralized control over sources of raw material and labor, through the office of the vizier.
In order to more efficiently run the nation, some responsibilities had to be decentralized, placing authority in the hands of local nobles and governors. Some were too tempted by the thought of holding power, and began to break away from the royal government at Memphis up in the Delta. Others, like Qar, who served in the 6th Dynasty under King Merenra, recalled that he “sailed upstream to the nome of Edfu as sole companion, nomarch, overseer of Upper Egyptian barley and overseer of prophets, because I was capable and appreciated in the esteem of his Majesty. I came to be accorded the office of lord of every leader of all Upper EgyptÐI gave bread to the hungry and clothing to the one who went naked in this nomeÐIt was I who buried every name in this nome who had no heir, with linen drawn from my own property.” Qar was later deified and a cult for him grew.
After the