Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.4> Article
Research Article

Comparative Study of Roman Empire and Qin Dynasty

Run HongGuangzhou Tianhe Huijing Experimental School, Huijing Street, Guangzhou, China Jinqi LiuSendelta International Academy, Xinsha Road, Shenzhen, China Jiacheng XuMilton Academy, 170 Centre St, Milton, United States*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Rome is a great empire centered on the Mediterranean Sea and spanning Europe, Asia, and Africa. After the republic system collapsed, the political and economic markets of the Roman Empire underwent various changes, while the cultural and foreign policies remained unchanged. The Qin Dynasty, the representative of the eastern empire, was the first unified feudal dynasty in ancient China. This paper presents a comparative study of Rome and the Qin Dynasty from the aspect of politics, economy, culture, and foreign policies. Roman’s political power was concentrated and spread out, as the power was controlled by the Senate and the Roman emperor. Meanwhile, the power within the Qin dynasty was highly concentrated in the hands of the emperor. Roman Culture is centered around religion, while the culture of the Qin dynasty is quite different. The mainstream thought was legalism, so the influence of religion was very tiny in the Qin Empire. Roman had a diverse economy, but the Qin dynasty implemented land nationalization, controlled commercial activities, and unified market management. Rome’s foreign policy was complex, and they used multiple tactics to deal with different nations, while the Qin Dynasty’s foreign policy aimed to resist foreign enemies. For example, the Qin Dynasty built the Great Wall, whose primary function was to resist the Huns.

Keywords: Comparative study; Roman Empire; Qin Dynasty
Published: May 17, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/4/20220580
Volume: CHR Vol.4
pp. 367-374
Download PDF

References

  1. Eder, W. (2005) Augustus and the Power of Tradition. In: Galinsky, Karl (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Augustus, Cambridge Companions to the Ancient World, vol. 13, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Eck, W., Takács, S. A. (2003) The Age of Augustus. Translated by Deborah Lucas Schneider. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
  3. Abbott, F. F. (1901) A History and Description of Roman Political Institutions. Elibron Classics.
  4. Ehlke, T. D. (2008) Crossroads of Agony: Suffering and Violence in the Christian Tradition. Bloomington: Xlibris Corporation.
  5. Rüpke, J. (2007) Roman Religion – Religions of Rome. In: A Companion to Roman Religion. Hoboken: Blackwell.
  6. Orr, D. G. (1978) Roman domestic religion: the evidence of the household shrines. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, II, 16, 2.
  7. Harris, W.V. (2000) “Trade”. In The Cambridge Ancient History: The High Empire A.D. 70–192 (vol. 11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 710.
  8. Francese, C. (2007) Ancient Rome in So Many Words. New York: Hippocrene Books.
  9. Nicolay Arkeologisk Tidsskrift (119), 81–90.
  10. Bigwood, J. M. (2004). Queen Mousa, Mother and Wife of King Phraatakes of Parthia: A Re-evaluation of the Evidence. Journal of the Classical Association of Canada. Project Muse. 4 (1), 35–70.
  11. Yining.(2007) The Prefectural System, Roman Provincial System and the Characteristics of Ancient Chinese and Western Civilizations in Qin and Han Dynasties. Seeking Truth,2007(03):131-133.
  12. Hongkun Zhao, YaGuang Li, Agricultural Development under the Background of the 'Agricultural War' in the State of Qin. Journal of chifeng university ·philosophy and social science edition,2017(11):3-4.