All shapes and sizes

We generally think of empires as being really big. The British Empire certainly was. It controlled nearly 14 million square miles, about 24% of the entire world! But many empires were actually quite small. The Akkadian Empire of Mesopotamia (2330–2200 BCE) only controlled around 30,000 square miles, an area roughly the size of South Carolina. Yet, it was a historically important empire. As we will see, empires are better measured by their power and wealth than by square miles.

Developing a definition

What exactly is an empire? To put it simply, an empire is a political system in which a strong central state controls weaker peripheral (outer) states. Nearly any kind of state can have enough power over other states to create an empire. However, all empires are not the same. The center’s control over its peripheries can be either loose or strong. It can strengthen or weaken over time.

The earliest known empire was the Akkadian Empire. For around 1,000 years, Mesopotamia was divided into city-states—small political units, in which a city controlled its surrounding area. In 2330 BCE, Sargon of Akkad took control of southern Mesopotamia. He ruled from the city of Akkad, the center of his small empire. The other city-states kept their own separate cultures. However, they became the periphery of Sargon’s empire, whether they liked it or not.

Let’s compare this with what happened in Egypt. Between 3100 and 3000 BCE, a ruler of Upper Egypt conquered Lower Egypt. But Egypt didn’t become an empire. Instead, it became a kingdom. Upper and Lower Egypt became politically and culturally united. The people of both regions thought of themselves as “Egyptians,” rather than as citizens of a particular city or region.

In general, empires result from a drive to gain greater power and control. In Mesopotamia, city-state rulers gained more power by conquering their neighbors. From the 6th through 4th centuries BCE, various states in northern India fought for power. The region eventually fell to the Nanda Empire (345-322 BCE), which itself soon after lost control to the Maurya Empire (322-185 BCE). We see something similar in China: During the Warring States Period (402-221 BCE) various kingdoms fought against each other. Then, the Qin conquered them all, creating the first Chinese empire.

So why empire?

Why would rulers want an empire in the first place? Running an empire is complicated. Empires create inequality, as peripheral peoples are not given the same rights as people in the center and are often oppressed. That often leads to rebellions that need to be put down. All of this is expensive, so empires need to be worth the high cost.

There is no single reason empires existed. In the case of Mesopotamia, empire was a solution to a problem: a lack of resources. The region lacked hard wood, stone, metal ore, and other important materials. True, these things could be gotten through trade. However, simply conquering regions with these resources gave the empire a cheaper and more dependable supply.

For other empires, the main goal wasn’t resources, but security or wealth. Rome first expanded out of Italy because it feared the states that surrounded it. The Romans decided to attack and defeat these neighboring states before they could hurt Rome. As their empire expanded, resources such as grain, ore, and slaves flowed into Rome in great quantities. This made the Roman Empire immensely rich.

Center vs. Periphery

The relationship between center and periphery is defined by inequality. The center considers itself superior. This provides an excuse for the center’s control of the periphery. Inequality is often reinforced through laws. People living in the periphery usually do not have the same rights as those in the center.

Peripheral peoples are generally not seen as true citizens. Therefore, the laws do not protect them. Roman governors were allowed to rob, beat, and even kill peripheral peoples. China’s Han Empire also mistreated its peripheral peoples.

Challenges to empire

Running an empire is not easy. The earliest Mesopotamian empires lasted less than 200 years. That’s because their rulers had to figure out how to run an empire. Ruling and feeding millions, and defending against enemies, was no easy trick. There was a lot to learn.

Then there is the periphery problem. We’ve mentioned how the strong center often oppresses the weak outsiders. But when the periphery is strong, it’s difficult for the center to control it. Each time an Akkadian Emperor died, the new emperor faced uprisings in the periphery.

Nomadic peoples living beyond an empire’s borders could also be a problem. These wandering groups did not live permanently in any one place. They wanted, and often needed, resources from the empire. But because they were generally treated as “barbarians,” they often had to attack the empire to get anything.

Another problem empires can face is becoming too large. As empires grow, controlling the periphery becomes harder. People living in territories far from the center generally do not feel very connected to the empire. Large armies are needed to keep them loyal, and stop them from breaking away. Another problem is that as an empire expands, so do its borders. Longer borders cost more to defend against outsiders. Both the Han and Roman Empires struggled to protect their lengthy borders against invaders.

Conclusion

Empires have formed across the world throughout history. The earliest were short-lived and not very successful, but over time, empires became better at holding on to their control over other people. But running an empire is expensive. When empires fall, it is usually because they can no longer pay the necessary costs.