Answer Question 3-4 sentences
Reply to ONE student 2-3 sentences
When comparing the rule of two Mughal rulers; Akbar & Aurangzeb, we can see they are polar opposites. Akbar is clearly a good leader while Aurangzeb is clearly a bad leader. Compare either Akbar or Aurangzeb to one person/leaders/rulers whom we have learned about at any point this year. Please state why you believe they are similar.
Answer Question 3-4 sentences Reply to ONE student 2-3 sentences
37 Comments
Kevin R.
1/9/2017 01:29:20 pm
i believe Aurangzeb and the mongols are similar as they greatly both expanded the empire. he is also similar to Nero as they where both considered bad emperors even tho Aurangzeb expanded the empire.
Reply
Gianna S
1/10/2017 02:21:56 pm
I agree with Kevin. I agree with you because Nero's death led to civil war and Aurangzeb was responsible for destroying Hindu temples and his policies were very unpopular.
Reply
Olivia S
1/10/2017 06:13:38 pm
I agree with Kevin because the two rulers both were harsh and rude to some of the people. They both were not fair to the people under there rule.
Reply
Catherine S
1/12/2017 02:35:45 pm
I agree with Kevin about Aurangzeb and the Mongols being similar. It is actually a fact that they similar because the Mughals came from the Mongols. I believe that Mughal is Mongol in India. That is why I agree with Kevin.
Reply
Nkayvian E
1/12/2017 07:25:35 pm
I agree with kevin because both the mongols and arangzeb got lots of land. He is similar to Nero becuse the both treated other religions differently.
Reply
jack w
1/13/2017 04:52:43 am
I agree with Kevin because even though Aurangzeb was a bad ruler he did greatly expand the empire.
Reply
Xavier L.
1/14/2017 02:22:10 pm
I agree, They both actually did expand their land. And I also Agree about Nero and Aurangzeb.
Reply
Wilson M.
1/15/2017 04:49:53 pm
I agree with Kevin because the Mongols expanded their empire to one third of the entire world. Also Aurangzeb and Nero were both very unpopular rulers and both made some bad decisions.
Reply
Claudia M.
1/9/2017 05:47:22 pm
I think that Aurangzeb and Akbar where both good leaders like Akbar took away the tax on non-Muslims so every one had to the tax Muslim or not. Aurangzed got a lot of land.
Reply
Gianna S
1/10/2017 02:11:48 pm
I think that Aurangzeb is a little bit like Caligula because he was cruel and mentally unstable, and he declared himself a god and tried to have his horse made a senator.Aurangzeb FORCED Hindus as well as non-Muslims to pay taxes. Also he was responsible for destroying many Hindu temples and trying to force Hindus to convert to Islam.
Reply
Lidia K.
1/10/2017 04:31:50 pm
I agree! Aurangzeb and Caligula are somewhat alike due to what they caused for their people. They both tried to do something that was uncalled for causing falls to many things.
Reply
Jamie D.
1/11/2017 10:04:49 am
I agree! They were both very harsh rulers in their own way. Like Gianna said, Caligula tried to make his horse a senator because he thought the horse could do a better job than people. On the other hand, Aurangzeb destroyed many Hindu temples and forced non-muslims to convert to Islam.
Reply
Brisy F.
1/15/2017 01:30:26 pm
I agree! Aurangzeb and Caligula were very similar in being bad rulers. Caligula, like Gianna said, tried to make his horse a senator. Horse aren't any smart then humans, and horses can't talk. Aurangzeb, like Gianna said, destroyed Hindu temples which is not cool if you ask me.
Reply
Olivia S
1/10/2017 06:10:59 pm
I think Aurangzeb and Nero are alike because they both were very harsh rulers. They both wernt fair to some of the people under their rule. As a result people didn't like them and revolted against them.
Reply
Miah V
1/11/2017 10:36:13 am
I agree Aurangzeb and Nero are the same but how where they harsh rulers. How are they not fair How come people didn't like the emperors. You have to explain more add more detail so people know why they are harsh rulers and not fair to the people.
Reply
Callie Kranz
1/15/2017 06:03:29 pm
I agree with Miah. Those are very good reasons.
Jamie D.
1/11/2017 09:57:28 am
I think that Aurangzeb and Caligula are similar because they were both very poor rulers. While Caligula was very mentally unstable and tried to make his horse a senator, he was a very harsh ruler. Aurangzeb was very harsh as well because he destroyed many Hindu temples and forced all non-muslims to switch to Islam. This proves that they are both very harsh rulers in their own way.
Reply
Brendan O.
1/16/2017 08:19:58 am
I agree he does sound a lot like Caligula with his harsh ruling. But I think Aurangzeb is more like Nero with a bankrupt country and the punishing of people from other religions.
Reply
Miah V
1/11/2017 10:29:53 am
I think that Aurangzeb and Nero are kind of the same. Aurangzeb broke Hindu temples because he wanted the Hindus to convert to Islam. Nero was responsible for starting the great fire and then blaming it on the Christians. Both emperors wanted different religions to convert but the Hindus and Christians didn't so they started breaking down temples and blaming Christians.
Reply
Angela C.
1/12/2017 01:16:28 pm
I agree! I was just writing about how both rulers were against some kind of religion or belief.
Reply
Kevin R.
1/14/2017 08:03:44 pm
I very much agree with you that they where both bad rulers. and that Nero caused the great fire of Rome...
Reply
Ryan R
1/16/2017 12:10:56 pm
I agree with you Miah. They both had a very influential part in religion at the time of their reign. However, the only difference in what they were trying to do with what they were doing was, Nero tried to get people to convert FROM Christianity. Aurangzeb was trying to get people to CONVERT TO Islam. I put it in capitals so people won't get confused, not to seem rude.
Reply
Angela C.
1/12/2017 01:09:38 pm
I think Aurangzeb and Nero are similar, both were known to be harsh rulers. And both were against different religion and beliefs. Nero was against Christianity, and blamed them for the Great Fire in Rome. Aurangzeb was against non-Muslims, he destroyed Hindu temples and even forced them to convert to Islam.
Reply
Catherine S
1/12/2017 02:54:53 pm
I think that Akbar and Julius Caesar were similar. I think that they are similar because they were both popular "good" rulers. But there are also some people that think hey are not. Like Julius got assassinated. Also some people look at it like Akbar spent a lot of money on building projects. But both rulers are pictured as he "good" rulers of Rome or of India. This is why I think that they are similar.
Reply
Marie H.
1/15/2017 01:04:02 pm
I agree with Catherine because every ruler does something bad in their time ruling. Yes, Caesar did get assassinated, but he was still a great military general and overall a good ruler.
Reply
Austin B.
1/16/2017 02:28:05 pm
I agree with you catherine because, some people did not like Caesar (mostly the government) most if not all people, liked Julius Caesar thinking he was a great leader.
Nkayvian E
1/12/2017 07:20:01 pm
I think arangzeb is like Nero because they both were cruel leaders. Nero and arangzeb both treated the other religions poorly and tried to make them convert. Nero started the great fire in rome, and arangzeb destroyed hindu temples.
Reply
jack w
1/13/2017 04:50:56 am
I can compare Jeluis Ceazer and Akbar because, sure they both did some bad things but every ruler does some bad things. another reason is I think that any ruler can be compared to any other ruler. what do you think?
Reply
Xavier L.
1/14/2017 02:15:53 pm
When I think of differences I think of comparing Kublai Khan to Akbar. Both of them were great rulers and did expand territories. And Both of them did tolerate certain stuff.
Reply
Marie H.
1/15/2017 12:56:42 pm
I believe Aurangzeb and Nero are similar because they were bad rulers. They are both bad because Aurangzeb was harsh and no one liked him, and Nero started the fire that destroyed Rome. Aurangzeb did add parts of eastern India and southern India to the Indian empire, while-like I said before-Nero destroyed the work of the emperors before him. This is why I think Aurangzeb and Nero are similar.
Reply
Brisy F.
1/15/2017 01:22:13 pm
I think Akbar and Julius Caesar were both very good leaders. Akbar removed the special tax for non-Muslims while Caesar controlled most slaves in Rome. Akbar also made every one pay taxes so it was fair to everyone. Caesar also worked to increase jobs. As you can see, both Akbar and Julius Caesar were very good rulers.
Reply
Wilson M.
1/15/2017 05:13:59 pm
I think that Aurangzeb and Nero were similar in many ways. Aurangzeb put a tax on all of the non-muslims and none of the muslims after Akbar had made everyone pay a tax to make it fair. Nero set fire to Rome and them blamed the Christians for starting the fire. Both of these leaders had done harsh things that greatly impacted their reputation and made people dislike them heavily.
Reply
Callie Kranz
1/15/2017 06:00:48 pm
I believe that Akbar and Marcus Ayrelius were good leaders because Akbar made wise decisions, and during Marcus Ayrelius'es rule there was peace. I think that Akbar was a better leader than Arengzeb because during Akbar's ruling, there was more peace than in Arengzeb's because shortly after his ruling, the Empire fell. I think having peace is the greatest thing an Empire can have besides good ruling, and peace comes from good ruling.Not having good peace is a bad sign, because that could mean that you have a bad ruler which could lead to that empire falling, like it did in the in the case of Arengzeb.
Reply
Brendan O.
1/16/2017 08:25:25 am
I think Aurangzeb and Nero are most alike. They both ran a bankrupt country. In fact, both people were bankrupt because of expensive to make buildings though only Nero actually built them Aurangzeb was bankrupt because of Shah Jahn building the Taj Mahal. They also punished people of other religions, the Christians in Nero's case and The Hindus in Aurangzeb's case, for no other reason other than because they didn't believe in what the rulers did.
Reply
Ryan R
1/16/2017 12:01:25 pm
I'd like to compare Akbar to Napoleon Bonaparte. They were both great generals, taking over much land and winning many wars. The only difference I see between these two as generals, is that Akbar didn't lose any wars, Napoleon however, only lost one battle. (Waterloo) Fun fact: Napoleon wasn't actually short, the reason for people thinking this is because he had a height requirement, one in which he, himself did not reach.
Reply
Ryan R
1/16/2017 12:06:09 pm
I think that Akbar and Ghengis Khan were two of the greatest rulers of all time. Ghengis Khan and Akbar have never lost a war and have made some of the greatest empires of all time. They both strengthened the economy by making the right decisions with the money that they had. Plus, they both died from illness, not the same illness but, still illness.
Reply
Austin B.
1/16/2017 02:36:21 pm
I believe that Akbar and Ronald Reagan are alike because in some ways both of them are good and bad, akbar spent a lot of money on buildings, but was overall a good emperor. And with Ronald, people thought he was a bad president but overall did some great things for America, like fighting in the war on drugs.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
May 2017
Categories |