Han vs Gupta
During the classical era, China and India emerged as the two powerhouses of the East asia region. Despite both empires using similar tools to implement social and political control, there are minute differences in beliefs and regional demographics that change the way these techniques are implemented. Both cultures used military dominance, a strong leader figure and previously established social hierarchies to remain in power. However, while the Chinese formed a strong, centralized government during the Han Dynasty, the Gupta remained fragmented and regionalized. Furthermore, while both cultures used moral codes and social guidelines to maintain social order, the Indian form was more religious, while Chinese version remained secular and focused on Confucianism and Daoism. Despite their differences, both empires were effective at maintaining order, and there methods are still being used today.
If you were ever an emperor, it would be important to form a solid plan of how to enforce your rule and make sure the citizens stayed in line. Luckily for the Han and the Gupta, there were already long standing social hierarchies in place when they rose to power. In India, the caste system was brought with the Aryans in around 500 B.C. This social system was further upheld by the formation of Hinduism, which stated that people who were in a lower caste were there due to their actions in a former life. The Chinese also had a social structure of their own, called filial piety. Much like their Indian counterparts, the chinese system had social ranks which a person fits into, with noblemen and officials on the top, peasants in the middle, and the “mean people” on the bottom. Despite these similarities, the roots of filial piety are secular, and are derived from the works of Confucius in around 470 BC. The Han greatly endorsed the work of Confucious, viewing it as a set of moral guidelines to help society function. While both were used to maintain...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document