Compare And Contrast Rome And Han Empires

There were two major similarities between the Roman Empire and Han Dynasty. Both the Roman Empire and Han Dynasty were great empires that had large land areas under their control. Han China and the Roman Empire put a lot of effort into building and expanding their territories. The Han Dynasty expanded their territory further Qin boundary and Romans wanted more territory for military uses. They manufactured streets that helped with trade and built new buildings, pipes, and

The falls of the Western Rome and the Han had both been on a gradual downfall after their peaks; however, the final fall of Rome can be directed at one major military mistake whereas the final fall of the Han Dynasty was a combination of pre-existing problems that led to a divided land. Previous to Rome’s fall, their republic style of government was successful and they quickly resolved most of the problems that arose. The Han Dynasty fell twice throughout the time of their dynasty, but after the first fall, regained peace and order for a period of time. Although both empires were fairly similar in the ways that they both declined, Rome fell due to one event, whereas the Han separated into 3 kingdoms after small but constant doses of chaos.

Although the foundation of both empires was built upon political integration, their organization of government differed. The Han Dynasty’s centralized power and administration was based on a bureaucratic system while the Roman Empire’s imperial power was based on a one-man sovereign. In order to improve Chinese society, which was under tyrannical rule under the Qin Dynasty, the Han Empire centralized their government with the synthesis between an imperial family and the new scholar-gentry class under a bureaucratic system. By securing power to overthrow the Qin Dynasty, Liu Bang provided lands to those military supporters who helped with the task. From the land grants given, the royal families and supporters were entitled

The Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire vary in their political development and achievements. The Roman’s developed two different codes of law, one that applied to citizens and another that applied to non-citizens. Rome’s trade routes were built using stone, which made it very easy for merchants to travel from one city to another over a vast amount of land. China, however, used a single code of law for all their citizens and conquered peoples, and used a long and treacherous trail in their trade; that lead to the Middle East. Even though these two civilizations held many differences, they also shared rulers who personally oversaw their governments to prevent numerous dilemmas and used expansive trade routes to build up their economies and

But the result of doing this made tripartite government with each have it’s power and rights. The First of the Tripartite government was the Magistrates and Consuls, and these Magistrates were Elected Officials, but there always two magistrates who would be the most powerful of them all and these the consuls who would get elected each to be charge of city and the army plus power over everybody. Now the second part of the Government was the Roman Senate who were made of the wealthiest and most powerful people in Rome that advised the leaders and would stay in office forever or until they die. The Final part of the government was the Assemblies and Tribunes, who were people who represented common people and elect the Magistrates plus like the rest they can only for one year. But now that you know the Tripartite government we can finally get to last important information which is about rule and

The Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire both had a great influence not only on its people but the world as a whole. The two had similar and different methods of political control. Both ruled their people under a bureaucracy, they had civil servants to maintain their large empires, and their foundations were made of great and strong rulers. Aside from the similarities they also had several differences. Take China for example, they focused more on Confucianism and they had a Mandate of Heaven. Rome on the other hand used entertainment to distract and control the masses of its population.

Although Han China and Rome shared similarities in their techniques of imperial administration though military conquest and engineering’s aid toward the economy, they differed in their approach to land distribution.

The collapse of the Roman and the Han empires were more similar than different because, they both fell because of financial issues, nomadic invasions, social unrest, decline in trade and corrupted political officials. The Roman empire began around 31 BC by Augustus Caesar and ended, in the west, when the last Roman emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was killed by a Germanic King in 476AD; the Han empire began by 206BC and fell in 24 AD. This empire was established by Liu Bang, who became Emperor Gaozu following the four years of civil wars. These empires are considered classical as they are timeless, never to be forgotten as long as there are historians.

Han dynasty emerged into power back in 221BCE after the fall of Qin dynasty 206BCE. They were the original pioneers when it comes to political systems and structure of the society that lasted more than 2000 years in China. On the other hand, the Roman Empire controlled the western Mediterranean and they had various advancements in technology and science. The Romans had different engineering accomplishments considered to be different from those of the Han kingdom. They formed the basis of the establishment of the western legal codes. This research is aimed towards analysis the similarities and the differences between the Han dynasty and the Roman Empire. The consequences of their differences are also analyzed in this research.

Many of the government-related attitudes from both the Han and Roman empires of the classical period had positive attitudes towards technology in their respected empires. A Han government official from the early 2nd century BCE wrote to a local official

As technology grew, it was viewed in many different ways. Both han and roman empires had state of the art technology developments and advancements, and they both adapted technology from other people. However, they had different views on technology. The Han empire had a more open and optimistic view on new technology, when on the other hand the Romans had more of a neutral look on technology.

Allison Sawey Ms. Rodriguez WHAP 6th Oct. 30th 2014 DBQ Essay In the Classical Era, 600 B.C.E to 600 C.E, the Han and Roman empires thrived in technology. The advancement in technology gave an opportunity for mixed opinions and attitudes throughout both empires. Although technology was viewed as most beneficial to the working class and more advanced than in previous eras, the governments of these societies played a negative role in the advertisement of technology. Overall, both Han China and the Roman Empire viewed technology as most beneficial to the working class.

Rome or Athens, who do you think had a better system of citizenship? In a comparison between Athens in 400 BCE and Rome in 1 CE, I believe Rome had a better system of citizenship. While both occupied the area that is modern day Italy and had thriving cultures, Rome had a better system of citizenship for three reasons: first, people with knowledge of how to run a government were members of the senate; second, Roman cities were willing to grant partial citizenship; and third, Roman citizens had rights. Because people with knowledge of how to run a government were members of the senate, the administration ran smoothly.

Both civilizations had very strong central governments which allowed for powerful and expanding kingdoms. Both empires had to develop road systems for their expanding military. The Roman army men were experienced and privileged and held high ranks in their class system and played an important role,

Historical debates are the most common, and often most effective, tool for which new study and scholarly perspectives are forged. The topic of municipalization might not seem at first glance like a vessel for heated scholarly debate; however, once one peels back the curtain, several lines of argument arise. Municipalization, in the classical sense, is the effective bringing-into-the-fold of institutions and governments under the control of a larger body. This particular inquiry will focus on the Roman Empire, and one particular source of law that has sparked a wider discussion on the phenomena of municipalization in the entirety of the Roman sphere-of-influence, the Tabula Heracleensis. More detail will be given to the specific aspects of