Both ruling in the first century of the Common Era, the Han dynasty peaking in the s and the Roman Empire in the s, these empires showed great military power, strived in economic trade, and their territories covered vast land. So how did these great empires find themselves plummeting to an unfortunate collapse? Although there are many similarities in the reasons for the desecration of these empires, there are also several contrasting reasons for the declines in economic trade, effects of the changing populations, and the failure of the political systems.
The rise and fall of the Roman and Chinese empires juxtaposed. The Roman and Chinese had much similarities but also many differences. Their economies were both agrarian and monetized, but adopted different models of production organization.
Their societies were both patriarchic, conservative and stratified. Each person had specific social roles and had moral duty to be contended with them.
Both societies valued the family, the nursery of authoritarianism, but the Roman made a clear legal separation between the state and the family, the Chinese did not. Their political power was mostly held by aristocrats, but the Roman senatorial aristocracy and the Chinese feudal aristocracy differed in characters.
Initially, their states were all city-sized, but the western city-state and Chinese feudal states had different political structures.
Because the conditions of the infant Republic and the early Spring and Autumn period were so different, and because the two realms undertook radical reforms in different stages of development, their rises followed different paths, and ended in two forms of absolute monarchy, a military dictatorship with wealthy elites for the Roman Empire, a bureaucratic autocracy with doctrinaire elites for imperial China.
The five centuries prior of unification of China were divided into two periods, traditionally called the Spring and Autumn period named after the Spring and Autumn Annals complied by Confucius, an aristocrat who lived toward its end and the Warring-states period.
In terms of technology, economic development, and political organization, China in the Spring and Autumn period lagged far behind that of the early Roman Republic. It caught up during the Warring-states period, when Legalist reformers prepared the institutional foundations of the imperial China.
China in the Spring and Autumn period was still in the late bronze age. Its main weapon was the chariot, which was monopolized by aristocrats. Private landed property right was unknown; land ownership was undifferentiated from fiefdom and political sovereignty.
People lived their lives in communal farms and collectively worked the seigniorial fields without compensation. Individual families used allotted plots for subsistence but did not own them; the plots were rotated among families for fairness.
There was no market for land. The more than a thousand fully independent tiny states were descendants of fiefdoms erected in the eleventh century BCE by the king of Zhou.
Their rulers, mostly distant relatives, still retained the title of lords and paid lip service to the now powerless king. Each lord in turn parceled out his realm into fiefs for vassals, who also served as his ministers.
The hereditary ministers owed loyalty to their lord only, not to the king. Thus although the king had notional authority over the world, substantive authority was distributed among feudal aristocrats, the lords and their ministers. The state was undifferentiated from the ruling family.
All ministries were hereditary, many held their own fiefs, and most were relatives to the ruler. Qinqin, the love of relatives, was the prime political principle. Aristocrats punished offenders, but had no published laws to regulate the application of punishments. They deemed their personal discretion sufficed because of their superior status and virtue.
The big achievement of the Spring and Autumn was high culture. Centuries of easy life had bred polished aristocrats who quoted poetry in banquets and political discourses. Their texts would become Confucian Canons, which would provide a moral gloss of their rituals and standards.
The precociousness of high culture relative to political and economic developments enabled bronze-age ideals to be frozen into the tenets of Confucianism and sway imperial China for more than two millennia. The rule of man and family values would continue to be the center of political principles.Fall of Roman and Han Empires The Roman and Han Empires were among the greatest empires in the history of the World.
Both ruling in the first century of the Common Era, the Han dynasty peaking in the s and the Roman Empire in the s, these empires showed great military power, strived in economic trade, and their territories covered .
Compare and Contrast the Fall of the Han Dynasty with the Fall of the Roman benjaminpohle.com the late Classical Period ( C.E.), all the great empires collapsed.
The collapse of the empires did not happen abruptly but was a process. The fall of the Han dynasty and the Roman Empire showed similar characteristics. Both empires simply got too big, too overextended, and when weakened were.
One difference between them is that the Roman Empire was a republic, where the wealthy aristocratic men got to vote for their leader, and Han China was a dynasty, where the ru le was passed down.
The Rise and Fall of the Roman and Early Chinese Empires. The Roman Empire and Han China of the first century CE superimposed on today's political map. The Roman and Chinese had much similarities but also many differences. *The Persian Empire was dominant between – BCE; The roman empire BCE CE * Both were ruled with authority of military huge portion of which was from conquered people.
Han Empire: The Han Dynasty ended in C.E. after a long period of corruption, peasant unrest, and a major peasant revolt in C.E. Internal problems were .