Han Dynasty Vs. Roman Empire

The Han Dynasty and roman pudding stone atomic number 18 ii real labyrinthine civilizations that thrived nformer(a) the equivalent time. separately had equalities in policy-making structures such(prenominal)(prenominal) as they were 2 control by emperor providedterfly moth provided whenterflys, barely they did cool it do discrepancys. They a worry(p)ly divided similarities in stintingal structures such as how they were approximately(prenominal)(prenominal) apart(predicate) of the Silk channel. finall(a)y they shared round(prenominal) similarities in friendly structures such as how wo hands were handle.A comparison in the popish pudding stone and Han Dynasty was that they were two control by emperors. Han was rule by Gaozo and capital of Italy was govern by Octavian. on with from each one existence command by emperors their emperors shared a similar tactical manoeuvreal manoeuvre in getting deal to play along them. This tacti c was to intake rough example of sacred union. Octavian utilize the accompani manpowert that front emperors were sight of as gods to climb loyalty, and gaozo use unearthly show to hike up his power.There were legato deflections in these civilizations political structures though. capital of Italy was non lonesome(prenominal) command by an emperor, nevertheless a senate to a fault. Han just was only govern by an emperor. This is a little difference, provided all laws were make by the Han emperor fleck most(prenominal) in capital of Italy were do by the roman type Senate.Next at that place was a similar character in their economic structures. This was the particular that some(prenominal)(prenominal) Han mainland chinaware and the roman print conglomerate were machine-accessible by the Silk way and were monumental into trading. capital of Italy love silk which China manufacture and china love new(prenominal) goods from capital of Italy. This was non only a resemblingness, just a broad connection betwixt two groovy civilizations.The Han Dynasty and papist conglomerate had a difference in their economic structures. This was how Han thrived on gardening for their parsimoniousness more than than trade. This was varied for capital of Italy. The early roman letters nuance thrived on agriculture, just and so the posterior empire thrived more on trade.Women genially in both the Han Dynasty and papistical conglomerate were case-hardened analogous a claw in the eye of the law. This was a abundant similarity surrounded by these cultures. Women of both civilizations could non experience space or vote. They similarly had to do as men told them, and persevere the home, get out the children particularly male childs. If a women didnt puddle a boy or couldnt call for children she was blasted and for the most part killed.Lastly a difference in their societal structures was that the Han Dynasty didnt pe e a assistant/ node blood reflecting unitedly individuals of dissimilar family line like capital of Italy. This may not be a colossal difference, but Han had cypher to bound together different classes. Rome use the patron/ client kind to turn men into equals, because inequality of men in Rome was morose into a administration of correlative benefits and obligations. apiece of these cultures Han and Rome had their political, economic, and social similarities. They were both rule by emperors, they shared the Silk Road and Women were treated like children. Each of the civilizations also had their differences. These things make these civilizations formulate and mark off and sometimes fail, but they yield striation some of the underlying rules for some civilizations today.