The Most Successful Leader Of The Aztec Empire

A thriving civilization enjoys a well based socioeconomic system. It seems that the most important figure o the political system of the civilizations to me mentioned, is the ruler. This leader can either be seen as clement and easy to disobey, or ruthless and strict. The most successful leader is the one who would elevate the status of the kingdom and the citizens, economically, and socially. In the most important kingdoms and empires the rulers had a reputation for being tolerant and wise, but when needed they were ruthless and often cruel. These civilizations were socially and economically successful because their leaders were not afraid to inspire fear, because the citizens knew what to expect from the leaders, and because citizens were …show more content…
It is someone that, keeping the interest of the state, defends and promotes the empire no matter however violent their actions might be. Machiavelli suggests that a leader ought to desire to be considered clement instead of cruel, nevertheless, he ought not to misuse him being considered clement. Before being conquered by the Spanish, the Aztec empire had a well-organized society, a thriving agriculture, and a successful economy. It had a social system ruled by various princes and lords. Like a feudal system, at the top of the hierarchy sat the emperor. Motecuhzoma, the Aztec emperor, was considered tolerant and overall a good leader. But he was obeyed by all because he inspired fear. Before the Spanish got to Mexico, Motecuhzoma asked his guards to get him wizards so they could foresee the fortune of the empire, because Motecuhzoma had had some visions he considered bad omens. But when some of the wizards were not helpful, Motecuhzoma ordered for them to be imprisoned. When these prisoners mysteriously disappeared, the emperor ordered his guards to go look for the prisoners’ families, and to kill them, and burn their property. A leader should not only know how to fight of threats, but more importantly, he must know about the management of those around him. People should not think he is soft and easy to disobey, nor should they find him so cruel that he would terrorize the society. …show more content…
According to Niccolo Machiavelli in The Prince, it is almost impossible to be a successful leader and a moral person in the Christian point of view. A good leader needed to know how to keep the empire safe, but he also needed to keep the interest of the citizens. Once the citizens understood this basic requirement, they stood to be less disappointed, and clear about what they need from their rulers. In Europe, the Renaissance was being experienced. During this period, the revival of the arts, politics, literature, and economics, brought with it social disorder, and socioeconomic instability. Further to the east, towards Asia, and down south towards Africa and India, the opposite was being experienced. Empires were becoming more isolated, but also more politically and economically stable. The social systems of empires like the Ming Dynasty, Korea, and Islamic and Hindu states, were becoming more rewarding towards its people. These empires were undergoing a social order based on meritocracy, but economic status still partially determined one’s social status. This meant that more citizens could have a chance of becoming a worker for the state, or to a higher extent, becoming a leader. According to Machiavelli, the princes who could become leaders should, at first, inspire trust and love. On the way to becoming leaders they ought to have a