Alexander the Great was famous for his military power and is a legendary figure in history. Much of what we know about Alexander the Great is unreliable and steeped in myth; a lot of these mythologies were used by Alexander’s successors. In the Kingdom of Thrace, during the reign of Lysimachus—a successor of Alexander the Great who lived from 361 BCE to 281 BCE—an interesting coin was issued. This coin, which featured the head of Alexander the Great with ram’s horns on either side of his crown, was issued in the ancient city of Parium, in the northwestern region of modern-day Turkey. The horns were the symbol of the Egyptian god Amun—or Zeus, who is often conflated with Amun—from whom Alexander claimed descent. Flanked with these godlike horns, Alexander attained the status of a deity. Silver coin; left, front,, head of Alexander the Great wearing the horns of Zeus Ammon; right, back, seated Athena. Silver coin; left, front,, head of Alexander the Great wearing the horns of Zeus Ammon; right, back, seated Athena. Silver coin; left, front,, head of Alexander the Great wearing the horns of Zeus Ammon; right, back, seated Athena. Image credit: British Museum Surprisingly, Alexander himself did not issue coins with his own image; his successors did. Why would his successors refer back to their deceased predecessor as they established new empires? The reason is that Alexander the Great was—and still is—a powerful symbol of power, military genius, and conquest, whether or not this description of him is historically accurate. His image, name, and legendary power remained resonant—and politically visible—long after his death.
"Justinian Code" is the "Collections of Laws and Legal Interpretations" developed under the sponsorship of the Byranztine Emperor "Jutinian" [ That's why it named after him] from time A.D. 529 to A.D.565
Anti-Federalists argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, while taking too much power away from state and local governments. Many felt that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen. Anti-Federalists feared the nation was too large for the national government to respond to the concerns of people on a state and local basis. The Anti-Federalists were also worried that the original text of the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights. They wanted guaranteed protection for certain basic liberties, such as freedom of speech and trial by jury. A Bill of Rights was added in 1791. In part to gain the support of the Anti-Federalists, the Federalists promised to add a bill of rights if the Anti-Federalists would vote for the Constitution
Federalists believed that the nation might not survive without the passage of the Constitution, and that a stronger national government was necessary after the failed Articles of Confederation. The Federalists met Anti-Federalist arguments that the new government created by the Constitution was too powerful by explaining that the document had many built-in safeguards, such as:
Limited Government: Federalists argued that the national government only had the powers specifically granted to it under the Constitution, and was prohibited from doing some things at all.
Separation of Powers: Federalists argued that, by separating the basic powers of government into three equal branches and not giving too much power to any one person or group, the Constitution provided balance and prevented the potential for tyranny.
Checks and Balances: Federalists argued that the Constitution provided a system of checks and balances, where each of the three branches is able to check or limit the other branches.
