Like previous class societies it involves a minority section of society grabbing the surplus created by the toil of the rest of society. But there are important differences.
Both had a central ruler, yet they were different in the ways used to control citizens and the handling of internal conflict.
Han China and Imperial Rome were similar yet different in the topic of rulers. Both empires had one main figurehead. With Han China it was the emperor, while in Rome it was the republic leader.
One big difference in the rule of the two main rulers was the lower class voice. In Han China the lower class had no say in political affairs.
While in Rome the lower class had representatives in the senate, which would transfer their thoughts to the main ruler.
The reason for the difference in the lower class might date back to the beginning of the empires. In early China it was always aristocrats that held all power, this idea system carried on for a long part of Chinese history.
While since the start of the Roman Empire, the lower class always had some form of power. This idea carried on for all of the Roman Empire. Another difference in the two empires rulers were how they were chosen.
In Han China all emperors were chosen by family ties. In Rome the rulers were voted in. The methods used to control citizens in the two empires varied slightly.
Both empires used religion to keep order. In Han china religion was used because of the exams system relying so much on Confucianism. In Rome the people were scared of the Gods, which led them to behave in fear of being killed by them.
The reason people held the exam system to such a high standard is due to the fact that it is the only option for middle class people to get into the Bureaucracy system. So many of the people learned and practiced Confucianism which taught peace and good behavior.
In Rome the Gods were known for striking down any that angered them. An event as simple as a house fire could be brought back to the Gods.
The two empires differ in how they kept the people liking the government. In China they used the Mandate to Heaven. In Rome the rulers took a different approach of treating their people well.
Other than the slaves everyone in Rome were relatively well treated. Both empires used social classes to unite their people. In China the rulers used a class of highly trained bureaucrats.
While in Rome, land and rewards were given to war heroes."Compare/Contrast Essay: Mauryan/Gupta India and Imperial Rome methods of political control" Gupta India ( B.C.E C.E.) and Imperial Rome (31 B.C.E C.E.) both had very distinctive methods of political control based on everything from cultural reasons to geographic limitations.
Mahapadma Nanda became King of Magadha and created what looks like the first "Empire" in Northern India.
While Indian history begins with some confidence with the Mauyras, the Nandas are now emerging into the light of history with a little more distinctness. Political Control in Classical Era. Political Control in Imperial Rome, Han China, and Achaemenid Persia during the Classical Era Social Structures and how the Roman government used them for political control Methods used to maintain production of food and .
Apr 18, · In the Classical Period, two great empires emerged as the most powerful nations on the map: Imperial Rome and Gupta India. The Gupta and Roman empires methods of political control were similar in their use of hereditary rule and imperialism, but different because of Rome’s slave class and India’s flourishing religious freedom and vetconnexx.coms: 4.
"Compare/Contrast Essay: Mauryan/Gupta India and Imperial Rome methods of political control" Gupta India ( B.C.E C.E.) and Imperial Rome (31 B.C.E C.E.) both had very distinctive methods of political control based on everything from cultural reasons to geographic limitations.
Analyze similarities and differences in methods of political control of the Gupta Empire with the empire from the Classical Period, Imperial Rome (31 B.C.E. - C.E.) Political Control of Gupta - Local rulers were permitted to maintain authority in .