Compare/ Contrast Han China Mauryan/ Gupta India Essay
Compare/ Contrast Essay
1. Broad Analytical Statement: Almost all successful classical civilizations needed a strong political base in order to thrive. 2. Thesis: Although both Han China and Gupta India’s political control directly correlated to religion, they differed in the centralization of their government, and what members of society became rulers. 3. a) Religion – Han China’s political system was directly influenced by Confucianism, and India’s political system correlated with Hinduism
b) Economic – China’s isolation led to them having a localized government.
On the other hand, India was susceptible to outside forces and influences, causing it to have more diverse culture, and therefore to have local governments.
c) Social – The Hans’ rulers were educated bureaucrats who were members of the upper class, while India’s rulers were princes of the royal ruling family. Paragraph 2:
1. Topic – Han China and Mauryan/ Gupta India’s governments both connected to the civilizations’ religious views and practices. 2. Comparison – The Hans’ bureaucracy focused on Confucianism, promoting political virtue and societal order.
In India, Hinduism played a major role in politics. 3. Evidence – . Rulers were seen as great superiors to whom people were to show great respect and obedience. The caste system very strictly divided people into social classes. Brahmins, religious priests were held highest in society. This determined who had power in politics. 4. Comparison – …
5. Evidence – …
1. Topic – The first noticeable difference between Han China and Classical India was the difference in the centralization of their governments. 2. Contrast – The Han were very isolated. India, however, was unlike China. … their government was localized, with differences from place to place. 3. Evidence – With little outside influence, their culture became very unified, leading to their economy and politics also being very unified. Their government was centralized, with everyone under one main ruler. Due to India’s openness to outside influences, they had diverse cultures and groups.
4. Contrast – China’s centralized and unified government allowed them to become a stronger civilization. Mauryan/ Gupta India wasn’t as strong of a civilization, due to their lack in unification in both politics and culture.
5. Evidence – Since China was overall more unified than India, many of the systems and beliefs they had and practiced during Classical times are still intact today. Also, although the Han dynasty came to an end, the existing culture remained in place with little change during the years and years to come. India was constantly changing during the next time period.
Only certain things, such as Hindu practices, still exist in India today.
1. Topic – Lastly, Han and India differed in the way a person was a leader and who could assume that role.
2. Contrast – In China, the Han rulers and people with the most power were the educated bureaucrats. India’s rulers were part of the ruling family who were leaders of the empire.
3. Evidence – (China) These people were elite members of society. To become involved in politics or to be any leader, a person had to take a test of intelligence, based off Confucian teachings and beliefs. (India) In society, Brahmins (priests) were held in the highest regard. Whatever caste a person was born into, that is where the person stayed, and that’s what determined the person’s importance.
4. Contrast – Han China was ruled in dynastic cycles while India was ruled in empires.
5. Evidence – When China’s dynasties rose and fell, a new ruler was able to take control and re-unite the culture. In India, when the collapse of an empire occurred, it went back to even more divided city-states. This also contributed to India not having a strong, lasting culture or government. Paragraph 5:
1. Summaries of 3 Paragraphs –
2. Why? –