Comparative Essay

Comparative

The Roman Empire and China developed into two of the major civilizations of the classical era. Though located on separate continents, they shared many characteristics, including the reasons for their collapse. Disease, internal, and external conflicts caused the declines both empires with the moving of Rome’s capital also being a factor in its fall; however the outcomes of their falls were different since China remained unified because of Confucianism.
The eventual fall of the Chinese and Roman civilizations was the result of a slow decline.
Conflict within the political systems of the Roman Empire and Han China was another factor that led to their fall. In the years during the civilizations’ decline, rulers had become corrupted and made decisions that ultimately hurt their society. Disagreements also arose in the Roman Empire between the wealthy landowners and the peasants who farmed the land. The same was true in China at the time.
Furthermore, both civilizations were major centers of trade. Diseases were carried along trade routes – infecting and killing significant numbers of people. This large decrease in the populations of Rome and China weakened the empires, which in turn contributed to their downfalls.
Both empires had large borders that were difficult and costly to protect. During the 4th and 5th centuries, the empires warred against the Huns, and in Rome’s case, against Germanic tribes as well. After Rome’s capital was moved to Constantinople, it became even more susceptible to invasions.
Though the reasons for the declines of China and Rome were similar, the outcomes of their collapse were different. Unlike Rome, China had religion (Confucianism) to keep its people unified after its government fell into disarray. Christianity – the religion of the Roman Empire – was to new to be a unifying factor for the people of Rome. Therefore, China was able to retain its identity as a civilization, and emerge once again as a world power, while Rome crumbled – never to regaining power as an empire. Even Latin - the language of the Roman Empire - is now considered a dead language.
All in all, the declines of the Roman Empire and China during the classical era were caused by the same external and internal conflicts and yet the outcomes of their collapses were different. Even though both had problems with nomadic tribes, political corruption and disease, only China was able to recover in the years after its fall because Confucianism kept its people united.
Continuity and Change

Rome emerged as one of the prominent civilizations of the classical era. It went through many phases and yet certain features of Roman society remained constant during the course of its history. During the early classical era from 1000 to 1 BCE, civilizations around the world continued to develop and some aspects of Roman culture and politics experienced changes while others stayed the same. The culture and religion of the Roman people – including the deities they worshipped, their sculpture and architecture - was greatly influenced by that of the Grecian people. These aspects of Roman culture, plus the use of the Latin language and slave labor, remained consistent throughout Rome’s history. Also, the same social hierarchies continued to exist – patricians were the elite and plebeians were the peasants. The oldest male in a family was customarily in charge and women had almost no rights. The only part that did change over a period of years was the law system, which developed as Rome expanded. As Rome grew, it went through many political changes. The Roman Republic was first established in 509 B.C.E. after it gained independence from Etruscan rule. The governing bodies of the Senate and the General Assembly were present throughout the time period. However, the amount of political influence they held varied. The fact that military generals gained power within the Senate led to Julius Caesar’s rise to power as a dictator. Augustus Caesar then came to power in 31 B.C.E after fighting Mark Antony for control of Rome. He kept the political system of the republic but was in fact emperor. He greatly expanded the Roman Empire by utilizing the military and also elected governors to rule over different regions.
Since local leaders were allowed to rule with a great amount of freedom, the various cultures of the empire remained intact. So despite the political turmoil and changes within the Roman government, the culture of its citizens, with the exception of the law system, stayed the same during the early classical era.

DBQ

During the Agrarian Era, sedentary farming communities formed across the globe while nomadic groups continued to exist. These communities often lived in close proximity to one another. In the period before 600 C.E, negative tensions arose between nomadic and sedentary societies due to their dramatically different ways of life.
The first group of documents (1, 2, 3) all were written by people who lived within a civilization. Those that lived in sedentary communities ranging from Greece (2) to China (3) saw the nomads as a completely different set of people who had no knowledge other than what was needed for basic survival. People who lived in early cities and towns had homes and more structured lives based on agriculture. Thucydides mentioned the greatness of his city and was more than content with the quality of life he had (2). With this outlook, he would probably have considered his way of life to be superior to the nomadic way of life. Nomads would wander with their animal herds and had no concept of a written language. As one who lived in a sedentary community, the historian Sima Quian was evidently biased against nomads, though he only wrote about others’ encounters with them. From his point of view, it was their inborn nature to hunt and go to war (3). Though Enkidu was a fictional character, his encounter with a nomad also supports the assertion that sedentary people couldn’t identify with nomads. Enkidu views the nomad who encroaches on his land as being almost godlike. It was these perceptions of nomadic communities caused sedentary farmers to at the same time fear and be awed by the nomads (1).
Further evidence of how the disparity between nomadic and sedentary life caused tensions comes from the group of documents written by nomadic peoples (4, 7). It was considered noble for nomads to make a name for themselves by conquering and killing other tribes. This was the advice given to a “barbarian king” (7). Similarly, the chieftain Shanyu speaks of punishing the Wise King by sending him to slaughter the Yuezhi tribe. Forcing other tribes into submission was the way in which nomads united regions (4). It is obvious from the documents that people in the sedentary communities didn’t share these nomadic values. Shanyu also mentions a fight between nomads and Han officials over a breach in the pact between the two societies – the Han officials intruded on a nomadic community, resulting in a skirmish. This is just one example of the small-scale conflicts between sedentary and nomadic communities. Tensions were present despite desire for peace on the part of nomadic leaders such as Shanyu (4).
The set of documents written by Romans (5, 6) confirms the strain nomadic tribes caused on sedentary communities. Both Synesius and Ammianus Marcellus display openly hostile attitudes towards nomads. It again comes back to the fact that sedentary societies considered nomadic societies very unlike their own. Ammianus Marcellus writes of how savage the Huns are because they do not have homes or written laws as his community does (6). Synesius even plainly states that Romans have nothing in common with the nomads as he tries to convince people to fight against nearby nomadic tribes. This was close to the time in Rome’s history where Germanic tribes were trying to invade the Roman Empire, which is the reason behind Synesius’s mind-set in the document (5). As can be seen, the tensions between nomadic and sedentary communities in the period before 600 C.E. sprang from the lack of understanding – on the part of sedentary peoples - of nomadic life. While nomads were more concerned with conflicts related to their honor or the boundaries of their lands (4,7), the tensions felt by sedentary peoples were related to their fear of the “barbarians” (5,6). All of the documents reflect some form of this attitude. Another document from the viewpoint of a nomad concerning sedentary communities would have helped to better illustrate the feelings of nomadic communities toward sedentary cultures. As it is, bias is only found in the documents from sedentary people. Also, the inclusion of a map depicting the locations of nomadic groups in relation to sedentary communities would have reinforced the fact the arguments over borders added tension between the groups.