Compare And Contrast Imperial Rome And Han China

Han China was a dynasty that lasted from 206 B.C.E and lasted till 220 C.E. Their empire correlated with another empire whom were about five thousand miles away, in the Imperial Romans who lasted from 31 B.C.E to 476 C.E. Both empires had an attribute that made them similar was that they were both imperial empires, affecting the government’s structure making them both centralized. Han China and Imperial Rome were different in a sense that they chose their kings differently. Of course in Chinese culture the mandate of heaven was usually an important factor however during the Han’s time the second king was selected by the first king’s wives who chose from many sons as she tried to take the empire over through her family. While the Imperial Romans went …show more content…
Both empires were centralized based off their empires locations. Without the centralizing of governments neither empire would have been able to strive. The Imperial Romans needed a centralized government because of the benefits such as Pax Romana the Imperial Rome golden age. Without the government being a coherent whole they wouldn’t have functioned properly, and would have been in constant chaos because there weren’t many natural barriers keeping the Roman land separate from each other. The same for the Hans who needed to be together and connect to maintain the empire as it was such a large piece of land. Throughout their time of rule both empires were imperial and under the rule of one ruler. The Romans had the Principate that called for one ruler controlling the government even though there was a senate. While the Han had rulers whom were deemed god because of what they had done for their people, and country, making both empires imperially centralized and without both aspects they probably would not have strived, and been as great as they are seen in