Emperial Rome vs Han Essay Example for Free

Emperial capital of Italy vs Han EssayThe Classical Period was a time where large, land-based empires were developed. The leaders of these empires were met with umpteen questions on how to control their territories. While two the Han empire and imperial beard capital of Italy exercised semipolitical control oer their empires through g everywherenment construction, they differed in their organization of bureaucrats and their reliance on slavery. Both the Han and Imperial capital of Italy exercised political control through similar government structure. The Han emperor, who was believed to be the Mandate of Heaven, had absolute power over all of his people. They relied heavily on their develop bureaucrats, the Shi, to carry out lawful duties. This reliance was supported by Confucian ways and stabilized the empire. Imperial Rome also practiced having a singular linguistic rule to control the entirely. The Roman emperor also was believed to have power over the citizens of Rome . The Romans also had their own home of bureaucrats who were valued highly. This social stratification unified Rome as a country. Both Han and Imperial Rome relied on social hierarchy to sponsor with exercising political control over their empires.They practiced this structure because it unified power in the state and slightened the amount of chaos. The Han relied on their bureaucratic class of trained officials to exercise political control whereas in Rome bureaucracy was given as a recognize to returned warfare heroes. The Hans bureaucrats, the Shi, were trained in the Confucian ways. This made the officials more reliable and prone to do the even off thing. The Shi were also taught to embody the law and enforce it in the state. This method of lead by precedent helped citizens strive to do their best.If the citizens were all hoping to be a better man, the society as a whole would be a better place. The Hans bureaucrats were ran more on a basis of trust in their behavior than the Romans. This method of trust in the bureaucrats was heavily supported by the Confucian teachings and their gentility in becoming better men. In Imperial Rome, bureaucracy was given to returned warriors. Rome hoped that by recognize good soldiers there would be more desire to go fight in a war and succeed.These bureaucrats enforced the laws rather than embodying them. They werent reliable, but were forceful enough to get the job done by using fear to make the citizens behave and do as the laws said. The bureaucracy was given to the returned war heroes as a reward for their accomplishments in battles. This gave soldiers more desire to fight and do well in wars so that when they returned they would be honored for their accomplishments. The Han relied more on trust to carry out their political control than Imperial Rome did.The Hans trained their bureaucrats to make them more trustworthy and faithful to their ruler. However, Rome used their successful soldiers because they fought in many wars they needed motivation for their soldiers to go be successful and to fight bravely and honorably. While both civilizations had slaves, Han China didnt rely greatly on their slaves however in Imperial Rome slaves were a critical and indispensable part of the society. In Chinese societies slaves were used in the main for at home chores much(prenominal) as cooking, cleaning, or going shopping.Even without slaves performing these domestic tasks, the Han couldve survived. Also, slaves in China were treated less harshly than those in Rome. The slaves in China were allowed to refuse certain tasks that were not included in their guarantee when they first signed to their owner without fearing a severe beating. Lastly, China had an overall more lenient experience on their slaves. The owners in Han were not as strict or cruel. However in Imperial Rome, slaves were mostly captured war prisoners who were being punished.This led to harsh punishment of the slaves to make sure they behaved and did as told. Slaves began doing a absolute majority of the physical labor in Imperial Rome which made them an asset to the Roman society. If Rome were to retrogress their slaves, the economy would crumble and the empire would fall. Finally, some Roman slaves were given high titles, such as lawyers or doctors. So to lose these slaves would be to lost tons of profit. Both societies used slaves, but Imperial Rome was much more reliant on their slaves than Han China was.The Hans didnt rely on slaves much because they knew that they werent reliable and if they kept a strong hold on them they would rebel and cause the fall of the empire. However, Rome used the method of scaring their slaves into doing the right thing. If the slaves feared a brutal beating they would be sure to make the right decisions and follow directions. In both Han China and Imperial Rome government structure was used to help exercise political control, however they differed on their organization of bur eaucracy and their reliance on slavery.