No. Not really. Politics weren't nearly as international back then, as t are now. It could be argued with some success that the Mali Empire was a regional power, but to be honest, no-one in Europe gave a fig about sub-Saharan Africans before t started to colonize the continent. And even then it was all about the natural resources. Same thing goes for Asia. It could be argued with merit that China was one of the greatest empires existing at the same time as the Roman Empire. But the Romans didn't give a fig, because t never encountered any Chinese.
What is wealth?” What is its purpose” and how does it relate to power and control and the formation of social and economic institutions. “ A few simple questions of this sort aren’t really what I’m interested in. But, I can definitely see why anyone in the Middle East could argue that he was, and probably was -and should be- regarded as a king. After all, this is the region which has produced the greatest monarchs in history — kings from the Ottoman and Persian empires to today's monarchs. They all came from this region, and the Middle East has long been at the center of the world economy and in the centers of world politics, from the fall of the Roman Empire to the rise of the American empire. But, I certainly can see why people may have different understandings of what that is. And I can.