Differences Between The Roman Empire And The Han Dynasty

1525 Words7 Pages

The Han Dynasty in China and the Roman Empire shared many similarities and differences when it came to political rule and the nature of their political authority. The most significant difference between the two is how the Han dynasty enacted policies that were shaped to counter the wrongdoings of the previous Qin dynasty, whereas the Roman Empire enacted policies shaped to create and promote peace and stability. The difference in the two empire’s coming to power was to account for their variance in political rule.
After the Qin dynasty, the Han ruled China for four centuries, enacting numerous political changes and governing one of the most efficacious dynasties in Chinese history. Gaozu, the founder of the Han dynasty was the first low-ranked official to found a dynasty in imperial China. In 209BC, Gaozu spearheaded the rebellion against the tyrannical practices of the Qin dynasty. The changes enacted by the Han’s first emperor are central to understanding the political rule and authority in Han China due to the fact that the rulers that succeeded him follow suit in a majority of his policies.
Throughout …show more content…

From this unrest arose the second triumvirate. This triumvirate was composed of Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian. The second triumvirate lasted for about one decade after the murder of Caesar. As with the first triumvirate, the leaders’ dissimilarities with each other started emersion causing some friction in areas of interest and political ambition. Octavian eventually exiled Octavian, and defeated Antony at sea, who eventually committed suicide with his Egyptian wife Cleopatra. Being the only remaining ruler, Octavian Returned to Rome and declared himself princeps of Rome. In 27 BC, the Senate gave Octavian the holy title of Augustus, and later ruled for 41 years. The policies he enacted set the groundwork for the era of peace known as the Pax

Open Document