Attila the Hun was the ruler of the Huns from 434 to 453. He was an extremely powerful fighter and often fought simply to gain riches and to instill fear. Many saw him as a psychopathic killer while few saw his reason and success in killing. He was given the name “Scourge of God.” In many ways Attila was like a modern-day terrorist, he thrived off other people’s fear, he killed mostly just to instill fear. Attila had a brother named Bleda, who co-ruled with him, until, Attila wanted sole power over the Huns and killed his brother. Attila’s father, Mundzuk, was the brother of Octar and Ruga, co-rulers of the Hunnic empire. Attila’s mother’s name is not known Unlike Roman children who were taught rhetoric and literature, Attila and his brother were taught in the strategies of …show more content…
Attila did not have any remorse for killing or any self-control when it came to the issue of murder. He was a man with a one-track mind, when he knew what he wanted he would do anything to get it, including killing as many people as needed. Though Attila was a very skilled fighter, he only knew his ways, he was a very weak force on foot. He excelled in fighting when or horseback or using his methods, including lasso. Wealth and gold very easily tempted Attila, he devastated the Rome to gain wealth and power. Genghis Khan was also a ruthless ruler, like Attila the Hun. Khan killed millions of people during his lifetime that spanned from 1162 to 1227. He is estimated to of killed about 5% of the population at the time. Attila also killed many people during his reign, simply out of greed. Attila killed many people during his lifetime, he killed these people out of greed and revenge, not for protection for self-defense. Regardless of how power is gained, it should always be used for the betterment of the region which is being ruled. Using power for self-gain is not right and only hurts the people that are supposed to be benefitting from your
ustice, fairness, and decency, abstract concepts that are innate in society and human nature. However, despite their near universal status in humanities mid, they often have different meanings for individuals. Aeschylus uses The Oresteia in order to explore these issues as characters in the play try to determine what it means to be just, what ought a just actor do, and what is the best model for achieving justice. The characters discuss ideas such as vengeance, reciprocity, balance, moderation, and finally the end result of the implied debate leads to a jury system. In this paper I will go over two of the several different interpretations of justice used in the Oresteia and compare and contrast them in order to demonstrate which is the best
If you are reading your history book, a play, or even watching the news today, you will see how people abuse the power that they have over somethings. There have been many leaders and people who abuse their power over civilization and places. Even the littlest taste of power often leads them to corruption. Many times, citizens and adversaries riot over some of the things that they disagree on and, in some cases, murder comes in to play.
There has been many great leaders in our history, but the one that outshone everybody was Alexander the Great. His father was King Phillip and his mother was Olympias. To this day he has had the largest empire in the world and was a successful ruler. So the real question here is how great was Alexander the Great? During his lifetime people would question if Alexander if he showed enough leadership, courage, and intelligence to be called great.
Attila the Hun was the feared and ruthless leader of the nomadic people known as the Huns from 435 CE until his death in 453 CE. Living in the Hungarian Plains, Attila and the Huns controlled the Western and Eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. During his reign, he invaded the empire on several occasions. Attila the Hun was the one responsible for bringing the Huns to their greatest strength and who posed the greatest threat to the Roman Empire. During his first few years of his reign, he had been apart of a diarchy with his brother, Bleda, until his untimely death in 444 CE.
Unfortunately, power has the ability to change ones perspective or belief in something. It is for one to decide if they want to overcome power
Genghis Khan was a feared Mongolian warrior that killed millions of people. He had led the Mongols into many battles between the 13th century and the 14th century(1206-1368). He had conquered many dynasties, but one of the most bloodiest was the attack on the swang and tang dynasty. The Mongols have stacked people 's skulls in piles and people have written of seeing the blood and fat in the streets of their enemies. This is a great example of why the Mongols had a negative impact on the world.
The Mongols were a clan of people who showed their barbarism through inflicting ruthless fear tactics, killing hundred thousands of people, and living by a set of uncivilized rules and barbarous body of laws. Mongols had countless ways of forcing fear not only on their enemies but among their own people as well. The Mongols number one method in ensuring that their people will stay in line is by threatening death upon them. If a few, in battle, flee from the enemy the entire group gets killed, unless they return back and in this case only the ones who originally fled are killed. If one or two from a group goes bravely towards the enemy, and others don’t follow, they are killed.
But first what is Power? When researching Power words such as authority, control, direct, command and influence all appear. These words all support the following statement “Power is the ability to influence and control the behaviour of others.” The problem with power is that it often leads to those in power abusing it. As Lord Acton famously quoted “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Once someone has had a taste of power, they will do everything possible to hold onto it. Throughout Hosseini’s novel, characters gain and lose power. They also abuse power, whether through friendship or fear. They manipulate the powerless to stay in their position. In Khaled Hosseini’s
It required extraordinary barbarity on the part of an overseer to affect him. He was a cruel man, hardened by a
In Greek culture, honor was immensely important and the Cyclops has none. In contrast, Odysseus brags about the great feats of Agamemnon yelling, “So great a city he sacked, such multitudes he killed”(9.298-299) That Odysseus sees pride in killing, shows that the Greeks valued killing, but only if honorable. There is a stark contrast between the killings of the Cyclops and those of King Agamemnon. In the eyes of the Greeks, Agamemnon’s killings were for his country, his people, and the greater good of society. These murders had a selfless purpose.
The Mongols Intro The Mongols have made a negative impact to all of us in one way or another. Some ways worse than others. Some of the things Genghis Khan has done may be cruel and wrong, but was what he had to do to be a great leader. The Mongolians ruled from 1260 to 1368 C.E, they were located in Mongolia, in the Northern China area.
”(Shelley 146). He got fed up with people and so he acted with such an evil intent. Thus releasing all his anger. But, here is the weakness, people get scared and resort to what they have learned over the course of their lives in times of strife. Other people that resort to the violence they speak of could be from there genetics.
How does it take hundreds of thousand of his own people dead for him to realize he should change? How does it take his own enslaved people suffering for years for him to understand that his actions are wrong? Should it had took his supporters, and his society dying for his conquering of land to open his eyes to the fact he is taking human lives? (Frey 161). Many modern notorious villains have done the same thing.
ABSTRACT: The present study intends to provide a profile of Adolf Hitler’s personality and presence psychological disorders such as antisocial personality disorder and Narcissistic personality disorder in it. INTRODUCTION: Perhaps it may be very difficult to find a person who does not know about Adolf Hitler. Just mention of his name invokes battery of negative thoughts and emotions of him being an evil person who killed millions of innocent people.