The Great Dynasties, Empires, Civilizations, And Nations

Some people would say the Mongols were a key development to civilization. However, the progress they made is nothing compared to their cruelty and the process they used to conquer the majority of Asia and parts of the Middle East. The Mongols were originally a small, nomadic tribe that originated from the steppes of Central Asia. The tribe placed little value on objects, considering they moved around in yurts and hardly settled. Led by Genghis Khan, they conquered land worth double the size of the Roman Empire. The Mongols were greedy, bloodthirsty barbarians who had little to no regard for human life. They went to unthinkable lengths to conquer land while destroying countless ancient cities.

“The mother of the world has been killed,” stated a 5th century historian, bereft and appalled when the news of Rome’s fall had reached ear. Certainly his words hold truth, for Rome - the dauntingly colossal Empire engulfing the Mediterranean and all territories around it; the source of artistic, intellectual, and cultural ascendancy; the influential factor of brilliance in so many of the coexisting societies of the western world - was truly the predecessor and creator of all Western Civilization to come. However, what no one knew, was that the lasting impression this powerful and astonishing civilization would make upon the world, even if only through the works of fleeting memory or written text. As always, with loss

The Roman Empire is Europe’s great creation myth. The great Mediterranean empire has left a great legacy of culture, language, conquest, art, and science in Europe and beyond. But everything decays with time, especially memory. Our archeological and historical understanding of the Roman Empire is limited. These gaps in knowledge, combined with popular misconceptions relating to culture, politics, race, technology, politics, and religion from the period, mean that any “period” piece is bound to be historically inaccurate.

It is evident that the two main largest classical empires were the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire under the rule of the Han kings. These two empires had many social, political, and economic features in common, but likewise many of those features different from one another. A political feature that both classical empires shared was that both had powerful executive emperors who held absolute power. A second political feature that both empires had in common is that both empires had a central governmental body which maintained order, organized funds, collected taxes, and made executive decisions. Socially, the two empires also had features in common. The first similarity between the Roman social organization and the Han social organization

From 1567 to 330 B.C. humanity experienced many subsequent development as well as decline in its civilizations. Among these events emerged three colossal empires that had shaken the world and forever changed the course of human history. The Egyptian, Assyrian, and Persian Empires have been instrumental in influencing technology, religion, and ideas throughout the world. Various factors have contributed to the success and downfall of these giants. Each of the “World Powers” have similarities as well as distinctions in its government form and organization, religion, and economy that contributed to their triumph.

Social structure is something that has been present all over history. There are many aspects used to define the social structure of a civilization, like race, ethnicity, class, gender, social mobility, and religion. One civilization in particular, China, has had the social structure of its reason evolve over time. Chinese dynasties from the Classical Era, the Post-Classical Era, and the Early Modern Period each established their own take on these categories. The dynasties from their respective time periods each differentiated themselves from the previous time period and allowed themselves to also have similarities between them. Chinese dynasties from the Classical Era and the Post-Classical Era are able to determine the factors of social structure that remain consistent and the factors that change throughout the time periods, which are class, gender, and social mobility. In the same way, the Ming and Qing dynasties of China from the Post-Classical Era compare to the Song and Tang dynasties from the Early Modern Period in China to define the consistencies of social structure through class, gender, and social mobility.

Chau’s thesis that the rise and fall of empires was due to tolerance, inclusion, difference, and diversity is shown to be true of the Roman Empire because of the way that tolerance allowed and caused the empire to rise, enter its golden age, and fall. The Roman Empire was a “hyperpower” that lasted from 44 BCE to 476 CE. The empire contained Western, Southern, and Eastern Europe, along with North Africa; thus, there was an abundance of culture from many different conquered groups. Romans wanted to make these conquered nations provinces of Rome. The Roman Empire began (and the Roman Republic ended) with the assassination of Julius Caesar, who wanted to be a dictator. No longer a republic, the lands already ruled by Rome became part of an empire. The government became centralized with a single ruler, the emperor. However, even before the empire, during the Republic, there was also the similar feeling of wanting to conquer other nations was there.

The era dominated by Roman empire is one the most well-known and influential periods of history, home to famous names from Julius Caesar to Jesus Christ. At its height, Rome’s territory stretched from the Atlantic coastline to the Middle East, reigning over 60 million people, one-fifth of the population of the ancient world. However, the Roman empire’s treatment of their conquered people’s and their own citizens ultimately led to the permanent downfall of Rome.

The Han Dynasty ruled China from 206 B.C.E to 220 A.D, and Polybius wrote his account of Rome around 200 B.C.E. Though the Han Dynasty and Roman Empire existed simultaneously, they were vastly different because they were separated by thousands of miles and high mountain ranges. It is widely agreed upon that the two empires had very little contact, especially in the years when Polybius wrote his account. Though separated, the two empires developed their own societies that were highly sophisticated and technologically advanced; they became the centers of trade in their regions of the world. Han China was developed with a larger emphasis on religion and nature whereas the Roman Empire was built on the principles of a strong military and political system.

The purpose of this research paper is to analyze the Roman Empire and the culture within that civilization from 43-306 C.E. Centrally located in the Mediterranean lies Italy, one of the three great peninsulas that can be seen from the south of Europe. The Roman Empire and its civilization has always been one to be admired by people and leaders all around the world. When the thought of this illustrious empire comes to an individual’s mind, one might assume that they may think of the great Julius Caesar and his tragic death, Marc Antony and Cleopatra, or even the great philosophers that flourished during this time. Thousands of years later the romans are still being praised for their advances in the sciences, philosophy, and government.

This book is a "Short History," of western empires which explain how European civilization and includes chronology of key events are influenced by the empires that was formed in it, like the Roman empire. It starts with Alexander and his Greek army and ends with the EU. Major events between these two events are empires like the Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, the Catholic Church as an Empire, the Spanish Empire, British Empire, and the European Colonial influence into the 20th Century.

Peasants became more and more agitated with the state of Han China as more of them became severely indebted to rich landowners due to heavy taxation. The only way to survive became to sell their land to the wealthy and become tenant farmers.

1. Albert M. Craig, William A. Graham, Donald Kagan, Steven Ozment, Frank M. Turner. “Republic and Imperial Rome”. The Heritage of World Civilizations. 1: 124-156. (2007, 2005, 2002) Pearson Education, Inc. New Jersey.

While it is clear that Pompey the Great was a successful general, how he came to be so is a more complicated matter. To analyse Pompey's career this essay will first examine his background, highlighting the advantages and difficulties that arose from being from a fairly new noble family. Additionally key events in Pompey's career will be explored chronologically, focusing on his most important military successes as well as his political career. This will attempt to determine how much his success relied on his personal characteristics or because of his he was able achieve his successes due to his personal attributes or because of his political relations with noblemen such as Sulla, Caesar and Cicero.

Abstract: In this paper I attempt to admire the spectator’s experience while viewing the Arch of Titus, and bring to the forefront why I find the Arch of Trajan to be underappreciated. I will compare the two by first analyzing the meaning of the Arch of Titus, and then analyzing and summarizing the Arch of Trajan. The source I used for the Arch of Trajan may be among the outliers of most scholars, but I find that I agree with their analysis of the arch in that it was not simply a list of Trajan’s accomplishments, but rather outcomes of his famed policy, unrightfully credited to Nerva, of alimenta.