The collapse of the Han and the Roman Empires during the classical era has some similar factors on the social and economic aspects, namely the decline in the trade and the widespread epidemic disease. However, each faced unique factors contributing to their collapse. In the Han Empire, the weak emperors didn't have a proper position as a emperor while the influence of army generals rise up gradually, whereas Rome’ ineffective later emperors concerned more with a life of pleasure than a desire to rule wisely. Although both Han and Roman Empire was splendent for a long time, the spread of the epidemic disease pulled them to down. This was largely because the food brought by the trade route carried the disease, while the native crops …show more content…
Trade played an important role during the classical era, especially the Silk Road. People from China trade silk and pottery with the western area, and also the Roman Empire trade the iron weapon to the east. Trade system helped both two empire boost their economy, since local people were now able to have goods that come from other countries, it made the local people’s more meaningful, it helps the culture to spread as well. People had better social basis to improve their life quality, so the trade system really enhanced people’s life in the past even today. However, since it is a really crucial role, the decline of it must lead to a serious result such as the decline of both empire. Chinese merchants used to trade pottery, silk along the Silk Road, but the Huns invaded to the northern part of China. The Huns took up the place, and killed a huge amount of population, thus the Han could not develop the trade. To be specific, the most famous war is the one that Han retorted Huns, it began in 129 BCE and lasted for about 44 years. This war ceased the peace for a long time, merchants were not able to trade while the war happened in the city so severely. In the same manner or way, the decline of the trading affected Roman Empire as well. However, decline in trade affected Rome more than Han China. The Roman’s economy heavily relied on trading, since the trade routes became compromised, bandits
Though they were both able to trade due to their expansions and coasts, Rome did much more trade than Han China. Also, due to this vastness, both societies’ cultures were spread all over the world (which led to other civilizations forming) and their economies were boosted (which led to better conditions for the people).
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
Contributions of both the fall of the Han Dynasty and the Western Roman empire were very common. For example, both the Han Dynasty and the Western Roman empire fell because of economic issues such as corruption. The great empires also fell because of diseases such as small pox and malaria. In fact, when the Han Dynasty and the Western Roman empire traded goods, they also traded the diseases to one another. Along with economy corruption the Han Dynasty and the Western Roman empire also fell because of their corrupt leaders. In contrast, the Han Dynasty fell due to weak tax collectors, too many people and too little land, plus many revolts. Western Rome fell because of unemployment, not enough people to do necessary jobs, and the idea that the people could create their own government and take over the existing government.
The Roman Empire and the Han Dynasty were both some of the greatest empires in their time. The fall of the Roman Empire was followed by the fall of the Han Dynasty. Three major things that contributed to these empires falling were the economic troubles these empires were going through at the time, taxation was a huge trouble for some of these empires, trade was also a big contribution, and being economically weak had an impact as well. Political reasons were a major of why these empires fell, both these empires had problems when it came down to their rulers, both these empires also split into two at a point, as well as the gap between the rich and the poor.
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.
The decline of China and Rome both shared similar economic strife in that they were both subject to barbarian and nomadic invasions, therefore having to spend large amounts of money on frontier defense; however, they differed in that the Han Empire collapsed in part due to the high taxes imposed on the peasant class resulting in a large peasant rebellion, such as the Yellow Turbans, while in Rome tax collections was in danger of abandonment as residents of the empire were few in number and in financial difficulty. In addition, the two empires were similar socially because of large epidemics, diseases, and plagues that caused a population decrease. Also, both experienced a
Throughout history, there were various empires which developed into great, powerful forces. These empires expanded their lands to new places but, these empires ultimately came to an end. Amongst these great empires, were the Han and the Roman empire. Both were great in power but, due to political, social, and economic causes, they came to an end. Although they do partake in the equal shares of corruption and problems with the military, they also had fair shares of differences, regarding their declines. For example, the Han empire had decentralization and rebellion while Rome had shifted in interests and developed war issues. These differences and similarities are bits of history which help to comprehend why these empires are no longer
Both the Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire became massive empires and dominated their region for a long time. In addition, both of these empires also had large impact on the world and extremely influenced the development of human civilization. Even in the modern times, the Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire have been the major subjects of historians and scholars especially when dealing with the development of stable societies . Although both of these empires grew in massive size, their political, economic, social and religious developments are extremely different. The objective of this paper is to analyze and compare the Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire in terms of political, economic, social and religious developments. It also opts to evaluate their overall impact to their
There was many dynasties and empires to come about between 200 BCE and 600 CE. One specific dynasty was the Han dynasty. This dynasty was involved in the unification of China. This dynasty was formed by Lia Bang and lasted from 206 BCE to 220 CE, with an interruption phase from 9 CE to 23 CE.The Han dynasty was between decentralized and centralized. Han Wudi was the greatest emperor of this dynasty, who pursued centralization and expansion. There was constant attacks from Xiongnu nomads of C. Asia; however, Han Wudi briefly came to control Xiongnu. Wang Mang, the regent for a two year old emperor, took power himself. He tried to redistribute land, but the wealthier people that did not want to get some of their land taken away assassinated him. In the later Han dynasty, emperors manage with struggles to control resentment. Another succession to come about was the Roman empire. The Roman empire started out as a republic, but soon Julius Caesar Seized Rome in 49 B.C.E. Julius Caesar centralized control but was eventually assassinated in 44 B.C.E. After Julius came Octavian, who ran a monarchy that was disguised as a republic. Octavian continued expansion and integration of the empire. There was an extreme amount of poor people; in fact, one third of the population was in slavery. One of the only things that was attempted was giving them bread and circuses to distract them. There was no policy developed for them. The Roman empire went through many rulers. Although these
An additional cause for the fall of the Roman Empire was the constant change in emperors. The document says, “For the next forty-nine years , the Roman imperials throne was occupied by anyone military strength to seize it -- a total of twenty-two emperors.”(Doc 1, 3-5). In short this means that they would let anyone with military experience came to power. The effect of the decision is that the majority of the emperors either died in battle or was assassinated . The Empire didn’t have a stable leader which is why the Empire fell. They needed a leader that would stay in power for a long time to keep the Empire from breaking into chaos. This compares to the Han Dynasty because they also didn’t have stable emperors which caused the society
The Roman and Han Empires were among the greatest empires in history. The Han prospered in 202 BCE - 220 C.E and the Roman Empire in 27 BCE- 476 C.E. By the early second century CE, Rome controlled the entire Mediterranean coastline and had to use military force to set up borders against their adversaries, the Huns. During the Han, colonies were established in Korea and military campaigns were mounted in order to control their neighbors, the Xiongnu. Both of these empires had similar rises by using strong military power and expansion, which helped them both strive in economic trade. Although there are many similarities in the reasons that contributed to the rise of these empires, there are also several contrasting reasons for their decline. These two empires differ because Rome allowed plague to end their empire while the Han kept ruling.
This Journal entry is exactly what is needed for me to determine why Chine was able to reunify and the Roman Empire was not. It compares and contrasts the history and structure of the Roman Empire and the Han Dynasty. This journal argues that the fundamental basis of each empire is significantly different, and even thought that is not my main focus, it does contribute to the argument that the difference in the socio-political stability of the Hand Dynasty was one of the reason that China was able to reunify. This journal discusses similarities and differences, giving me the opportunity to analysis each one, and
As stated above, one way the collapse of the Han Dynasty and the collapse of the Roman Empire compare is they both had external conflict with other nations. The Xiongnu invaded the Han which destabilized the Han’s government and also negatively impacted trade on the Silk Road. These invasions
Rome and China were some of the oldest and most well-known countries in the ancient world. The Han dynasty was a long-lasting dynasty in China's history, and the Roman Empire had a long and strong rule. Like the rules of these empires, the falls of these empires were very impressive. Several similarities to the falls of these empires are apparent. One is the fact that they were both invaded by other tribes that threatened their power. Another was the government corruption that weakened them from the inside. And the last, yet very common is historical societies was taxes and economic reasons.
Over this millennium, there are several political similarities between empires established in 500 CE and 1500 CE. According to Mark Lewis, one major reason why the Han Dynasty collapsed in 220 CE is due to the government’s inability to stabilize its frontier. The population near the frontier was in serious decline, and this shows the government’s weakness. Similarly, in in “The Road to Defeat,” Conor Perkins explains the Roman Empire, which fell in the fifth century, lacked stability due to their inefficiency to collect taxes. This was detrimental because the strength of their army depended on the taxpayers’ money. Again, this highlights the lack of inefficiency in a government that was experienced in both the Roman Empire and Han Dynasty. Similarly, several centuries later, the Mongol Empire collapsed in 1368 due to internal issues. Court factionalism resulted in a series of civil wars that rocked the