Claim: The Roman Empire and Han China had different social characteristics.
Evidence: The passage states that the
Roman Empire was "torn by class conflict,"
while Han China had no "irreconcilable
class conflicts".
0
We may talk about the Chinese and the Roman empires" and use the same
word empire' to describe them both. Are we, however, justified in so doing?
... Firstly, the Roman empire was maritime, mercantile, urban and
militaristic. It was based on the Mediterranean and the unity of the trade
routes, crisscrossing the Mediterranean and spilling out into the Black Sea.
The (Han) Chinese empire, on the other hand, was territorial, agricultural,
rural and civilian. It was based on the river valleys of the [Yellow) and
Yangtse and on the unity of agricultural techniques over this area. Secondly,
the Roman empire was socially unharmonious, was torn by class conflict, and
was highly unstable. The Chinese empire, on the other hand, was socially
harmonious, had no irreconcilable dass conflicts and was highly stable.
O
Claim: The Roman Empire and Han China
had different social characteristics.
Evidence: The passage states that the
Roman Empire was "mercantile", while Han
China had a unity of "agricultural
techniques".
5. A. M. Adshead, article written in an academic journal, 1961
o
Claim: The Roman Empire and the Han
dynasty of Han China were connected by
overland and maritime trade
routes.
Evidence: Rome was "based on the
Mediterranean," while Han China was
"highly stable".
e
Claim: The Roman Empire and Han China
were connected by overland and maritime
trade
routes.
0
Evidence: The passage states that Han
China was based on the Yellow and
Yangtze River valleys, while Rome was
"maritime" and "urhan"