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 break a criminal's 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...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document