Skip to content

Political philosophy

Empire

The political form in which authority is centralised in a single ruler over a large, diverse and conquered territory — and the long ancient and medieval inquiry into how to read it.

The classical inquiry

Empire — the political form in which authority over a large, diverse and conquered territory is concentrated in a single ruler — was older than the Greek inquiry into it. The Persian Empire of Cyrus and his successors is the great extant case the Greeks looked at; the Macedonian conquest that followed Alexander made the form one fifth-century Greeks had inherited as a fact. Xenophon's Cyropaedia is the most extended ancient treatment of how a single ruler comes to govern such a body well; Polybius, Sallust and Tacitus are the principal Roman analysts of what the same form does to a polity that began as a republic.

What the tradition asks

The classical tradition does not treat empire as straightforwardly illegitimate. What it asks is harder. Who is fit to rule on this scale, and how do they come to be? What does the form do to the character of the ruler, and to the institutions of the conquered? Does empire necessarily corrupt — Sallust, Tacitus, Augustine and a long line after them all answer yes in different keys — or is there a form of imperial rule that is actually well-ordered, the way Xenophon presents the rule of Cyrus?

Why it matters for Virtue & Power

Empire and republic are the platform's two anchor categories of regime. The transition between them — most famously Rome's, but also Persia's, Macedonia's and Athens' brief naval empire — is one of the recurring historical case studies the editorial layer returns to. See the essay on Augustus and the transformation of Rome and the comparison entries on the late Republic.