A tyrant was appointed to bring a balance to a society where the ruling upper class was so exploiting the lower classes that revolution and self-destruction was becoming inevitable. The aristocracy resented this but had to put up with it as long as the tyrant retained overall public support. The tyrant was, however, under constant threat of assassination and so had to hire a large bodyguard, and impose a tax to pay for it. No Greek class liked taxes and so the tyrants were eventually deposed or murdered, opening the way for a trial of democracy as an alternative. Democracy often failed, bringing back the aristocrats, another tyrant of a king, and so the cycle went on.
They were popular for taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor and also building new things
A tyrant was appointed to give some equality in a city-state split by upper classes exploiting the lower classes. The tyrant's problem was that the aristocracy would set out to assassinate him in order to regain ascendancy and control. The tyrant would have to establish a large bodyguard, and to pay for them, collect a tax. All classes hated taxes, so the tyrant's support waned and would be expelled, with either the aristocrats taking over or a democracy was set up by the lower classes.
By redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor
no
no
It was important because it support the constitution
They Had The Poor Help Them :-)
Tyrant
Because most of the population is poor and sport is sometimes they only way that they can support there family.
I cannot think of ANY tyrant that was liked in all history.
Pisistratus gained the support of the poor, rural people by establishing wise land laws.
This is a dictatorship.
The tyrant.
The tyrant.
Support for the tyrants came from the growing middle class and from the peasants who had no land or were in debt to the wealthy land owners.
Tyrant originally just meant someone who rules by themselves, however during the time of the Roman Empire, the last tyrant of the old regime, Tarquinius Suberbus (Tarquin the Proud) changed the definition. He was very unpopular with the people, and was exiled because of it. From that moment, the people would despise anyone who even mentioned the word King, and the King was a tyrant. This is where the modern word with the attachments of negative connotations comes from. The second point depends on what exactly you define as important. Tyrants were certainly important for the Romans and previous civilisations. Until recently, the world was run by monarchs who were tyrants, as there was no input from anyone else; the King/Queen's word goes. This is important; the People have no say if there is a tyrant on the throne. If this is not what you meant, I apologise in advance, and request that you refine the question.
A synonym for tyrant is dictator. Some other synonyms for tyrant are autocrat, oppressor, despot, and authoritarian. A tyrant is an oppressive ruler.
A tyrant rules with his fist. There is no room for a tyrant in a democracy.