Han China vs. Imperial Rome

560 Words3 Pages
Han China vs. Imperial Rome The methods of political control used in Han China (206 B.C.E-220 C.E.) were similar to that of Imperial Rome (31 B.C.E-476 C.E.); however, these societies greatly differed on their oppositions of governing and the techniques used in maintaining control over citizens, expansions, and their falls. Han China and Imperial Rome had similar governments because they were ruled under one central leader, however, Han China had an emperor that enforced policies and Imperial Rome had a republic because they felt the monarchy did no good to the people. The Senate of Rome had most control over the citizens. Han China did not allow lower class citizens to have a say on how the empire was ruled; while, Imperial Rome had a senate to represent their plebeian’s or ordinary people. Another difference between the Han China and Imperial Rome was that the emperor of Han China had been chosen through the family and the citizens of Imperial Rome chose their ruler. Han China and Imperial Rome emphasized territorial expansion in both of their societies. They perceived threats to security; this led to war and then increased the length of border. The difference between their expansions was that Imperial Rome built its army from citizen-farmers, due to the conquest Rome had many slaves. Han Chine had a military at their disposal to enlarge the empire. Han China had conquered many lands but unlike Imperial Rome, Han China did not have slaves as a result of their growing territory. In order to work in the office of Imperial Rome he had to serve 10 years as a solider; while, Han China picked the upper class through the family. Han China, unlike Imperial Rome, had a military that wasn’t as strong. Han China and Imperial Rome were both similar in their falls due to the fact that the Huns invaded both of them but their falls also differed. When Rome fell it was
Open Document