The Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire were two grand empires that rose out of preexisting territories and provided relative peace over wide areas. The collapse of the Qin Dynasty (221-206 BCE), which was the first great land-based empire in East Asia, came after a period of war, confusion, and tyrannical rule. Due to the political disorder that stemmed from the early dynastic activity, the emergence of the Han Dynasty (206 BCE- 228 CE) sprung to focus on restoring order. On the other hand, the rise of the Roman Empire (44 BCE- 476 CE) originated from consolidating authority over aristocratic landlords and overriding the democratic elements of the earlier Republic. Instead, the Roman Empire redefined the concept of “citizen” as subjects to the Roman emperor. Both empires shared similar agendas to exploit their vast territories and resources, which helped them expand their political dominance; however, despite having similar political goals and foundations, their government system, cultural ideologies and imperial expansionist natures diverged.
Both the Han and Roman empires emphasized on territorial expansions. By utilizing their powerful militaries, they consolidated their power within and across borders, which created stable trade networks for their economic bases. Land equated to wealth and power. Through integration of the local domains, both empires succeeded in political stability. For the Han Empire, their expansion abroad pushed through ecological limits under Emperor Wu Di ( 181-87 BCE), who made military service compulsory. The army expanded bordered into northern Vietnam and southeastern China. Although there were military threats from the Xiongnu, the nomadic people of the north, Wu launched defense attacks that made ...
... middle of paper ...
... weaker state will remain neutral from a military strength. Melians’ loss reaffirms the absolute power of imperial conquests and nationalism in theories of realism. Since the Melians were allied with the Spartans and failed to cooperate, it is justifiable that the Athenians had the right to want to rule and invade the Melians as means to protect their own strengths.
Works Cited
Gochberg, Donald S. World Literature and Thought. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College, 1997. Print.
Pomeranz, Kenneth, James Buchanan. Given, Laura Jane Mitchell, and Robert L. Tignor.Worlds Together, Worlds Apart: A Companion Reader. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2011. Print.
Polybius, Rome at the End of the Punic Wars. Ancient History Sourcebook
Poetry of the Han Dynasty
Thucydides, The Melian Debate
Tung Chung-Shu, Luxuriant Gems of the Spring and Autumn Annals.
The Han Dynasty and Roman Empire existed around the same time period and both lasted around 400 years. They each had large populations (around 50 million), conquered enemies they felt as a threat, wanted to spread their boundaries and had strong militaries. The Han Dynasty, located in China, was built on other dynasties such as the Qin and Zhou. The Great Wall of China was built during
In the Melian Dialogue, it describes the negotiation between the people of Athens and the people of Melos. The people of Melos wants their independence and the Athenians who wanted to invade and expand their territory. “Because you would have the advantage of submitting before suffering the worst, and we should gain by not destroying you”. The Athenians were giving the Melian leadership an ultimatum. They could surrender or the Athenians would take over. “While the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”. The Athenians are demonstrating dictatorial actions on the Melians. There is also evidence in that again in the Athenian dialogue. “Of the gods we believe, and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever they can. All we do is to make use of it, knowing that you and everybody else, having the same power as we have would do the same as we do”. The Athenians believe that it is their right to take over the Melians and any country they would like to control because they
When comparing different societies in ancient history you may not think that Han China and Ancient Rome had a lot in common. These two great societies had many similarities and differences, especially in their social structures. These similarities and differences are all due to Han China’s and Ancient Rome’s governments, family structures and religions. Both of these wonderful empires lasted for approximately 400 years and had lasting effects on the lands they conquered.
Qin Shihuangdi created the “first Chinese Empire a unified entity upon which he imposed an empire wide uniformity of law administered by a bureaucracy that was answerable to a central authority” (Overfield 98). The Qin Dynast...
From 1700 to roughly 220 BCE (before the Common Era), the region currently known as China was divided into six states: Qin, Wei, Zhao, Qi, Yan and Zhongshan, each ruled by different kings. These inter-warring states were already familiar with wall building techniques, each having constructed extensive fortifications to defend their own borders. When Shih Huangdi, the young king of the ancient Chinese state of Qin (also spelled Ch’in, from which the word China derives), conquered each of the remaining five states in 221 BCE, the continuous warring finally came to an end. By conquering these states, Shih Huangdi established the Qin Dynasty, thus creating the first unification of China, and the first Chinese central government. In his efforts to make this new concept of centralized rule “stick”, as well as prevent the reemergence of feudal lords, Shih Huangdi ordered the destruction of the wall sections that divided his empire along the forme...
...s. Through the definition of Athenian nature, the Corinthian anticipate the inevitable conquest of Sparta. The differences between Spartan and Athenian character is meant to facilitate a new approach by Sparta for defending peace. The Corinthians argue that the Athenians by nature are dangerous and the Spartans must attack first. The Corinthians address the differences in Athenian and Spartan natures to depict the inevitable dominance of a single one. According the Corinthians, the “use [of] their power” invokes a preemptive attack. The preemptive attack is capable of deterring the Athenian interest in the Peloponnesus. The Corinthians imply an initial attack against Athens is capable of preventing the growth of Athenian confidence. The Corinthians imply preemptive attacks are justified if they prevent an aggressor from posing a threat to an empire or alliance.
The great empires that flourished between 300 B.C.E and 200 B.C.E. can all be broken down into the four factors the contributed to their rise. Although each empire faced prolonged periods of conflict, all four empires succeeded in imposing unity and order among the people. The rise of these empires can be attributed to four specific factors crucial to their construction. The factors crucial to the rise of the great empires included having a centralized form of leadership with enforced uniform legal codes, having powerful military forces, a strong economy, and technological advances. Ultimately an efficiently run, centralized government along side powerful military forces caused the success of the empires however in the same not a decentralized form of leadership and weakened military attributed to the great empires eventual collapse.
The Han dynasty and the Roman Empire were both powerful empires during their era. However, the ways they obtained their power varied greatly because they used different methods that involved their political structures, which revolved around their centralized governments. The Han dynasty and the Roman Empire acquired very unique techniques that allowed them to control social and political. For example, the Han dynasty adopted a religion known as Confucianism, which monitored everything in the lives of the Chinese. Contrary, the Roman Empire established a monarchy but allowed its residents more freedom as compared to the Han. Nevertheless, the two empires were similar in political structures in that the power was depended on the wealthy that were in authority, the peasants struggled with their lives because of concerning issues such as food supply. The empires were able to create and preserve a peaceful and sustainable lives for a long time, unlike the past empires. Social distribution were under the control of the wealthiest and they could effortlessly impact community viewpoints and interactions among the residents. These two empires existed during the Classical Period had comparable and various social, political, religions, as well as economical values and practices. However, they both possessed differences and similarities in their economic and social perspectives even though the two empires were established around the same era.
More than two thousand years ago, two great empires arose. The Chinese and the Roman Empires. Having different locations, there were obvious differences from the start, assembly and the collapse of the empires, but there were also astonishing similarities. Located in modern time Asia and Europe, the Chinese and Roman empires were revolutionary with their ideas and accomplishments in their time from the start to the end of their empires.
During the rise of civilization, empires became a prominent way that this civilization was expressed. Two very powerful empires during this era were the Roman Empire and Han China. All empires, or governments that extend,to include many different lands and people, have inevitably fallen, and the collapse of Han China and the Roman Empire are similar for many reasons. In analyzing the similarities among the collapse of these civilizations, historians can see the problems with this type of government and some universal problems that were relevant at the time.
T: Classical civilizations, Han China and Imperial Rome, spanning from 206 BCE to 220 CE and 31 BCE to 476 CE, respectively, shared multiple political aspects such as an emphasis on territorial expansion and a gradual internal collapse. However, they differed in a dissimilar social hierarchy, China favoring the scholar-gentry class, Rome preferring the aristocratic class.
After the Period of the Warring States and during the fourth and third centuries B.C.E., the Qin state of western China transformed its economic, political, and military development. With few obstacles holding them back, the Qin established a centralized, bureaucratic rule throughout their state. At the same time, they devoted their recently acquired wealth to the advancement of an organized military and the best iron weapons available1. Qin rulers attacked neighboring states and absorbed the new conquests into their bureaucracy until China was finally under the motion of a single state. In 221 B.C.E., Qin Shihuangdi declared himself the First Emperor, and like those who led the Qin before him, he ignored the noble blood and led a centralized
The Melians argued using consequences of an Athenian take over. In section 110, the Melians threatened that if their allies the Lacedaemonians were provoked by the takeover of Melos, they might attack Athens itself: "...the Cretan sea is a large place; and the masters of the sea will have more difficulty in overtaking vessels which want to escape than the pursued in escaping. If the attempt should fail they may invade Attica itself, and find their way to allies of yours whom Brasidas did not reach: and then you will have to fight, not for the conquest of a land in which you have no concern, but nearer home, for the preservation of your confederacy and of your own territory." In addition, the Melians complained that they would be thought of as cowards if they surrendered, and they warned the Athenians that hostility would turn other neutral city-states against them.
The Realist, absolutely dedicated to the preservation and security of the Athenian Empire declares stoutly, “General, it is no great surprise that our negotiations reflected the success and dominance of realism in the political arena.” The Liberal, mindful of universal pathos over such a nationalistic approach, gasps. Deeply moved by the proceedings of the Melian dialogue, and aghast at the lack of understanding in her fellow representatives, she offers a venomous retort, “To hell with realism! Can’t you see the truth? Oh, my comrades are blind to the universal laws of right and wrong! Truly, our very invasion of this people is immoral! We should be moved by empathy and compassion for the Melians!” A steady, even voice i...
Melians to become a part of their empire, while the Melians which to remain independent. Athens had