By comparing the governance systems of the Chinese Han Dynasty (206 BC- AD 220) and the Roman Empire, we can better understand why these two immense entities had different fortunes as time went by.

The Han Dynasty was essentially governed by organizing the state into prefectures, which were in turn subdivided into counties, with the central government ruling vertically over all areas under its control. The Roman Empire, on the other hand, adopted a dual structure: the Principate system of Emperor and Senate was implemented in its core area, while conquered areas were ruled by Roman governors under the Provincial system. This fundamental difference in structure is an important reason for the different fates of the Chinese Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire.

Ancient China: the system of prefectures and counties

After the Qin Dynasty (221 -206 BC) was established, Emperor Qinshihuang abolished the system of enfeoffment and replaced it with a system of prefectures and counties throughout the whole country. In ancient China, the imperial court controlled the whole state; regardless of how the dynasties changed, the unified system of prefectures and counties and the concept of vertical governance it contains continued.

At the beginning of the Han Dynasty, the system of prefectures and counties coexisted with the enfeoffment system in the state. However, from the time of Emperor Wendi of Han (202 - 157 BC), the imperial court began to take measures to weaken the remaining vassals. During the reign of Emperor Wudi of Han (157 - 87 BC), Tui'en Decree (a decree of promoting the emperor's grace) was implemented to replace the previous policy of directly reducing the power of the vassal states. According to this decree, when the leader of a vassal state died, the land under his jurisdiction was to be divided equally between his first, second, and third sons instead of being inherited merely by his eldest son. This policy gradually made the vassal states smaller and smaller, and finally led to their disintegration due to their constant internal subdivision.

In addition, Emperor Wudi of Han established a state monopoly for salt and iron, which undermined the power of rich merchants and magnates. He also revered Confucianism as the sole dominant ideology among various schools of thought. The Han Dynasty established a highly centralized and unified system of directly appointing rulers of prefectures and counties—the only state structure in feudalist China.

The Roman Empire: dual structure

Compared to the system of direct governance in the Chinese Han Dynasty, the Roman Empire was governed in a very loose way, with a dual system of central and provincial government. By the end of the Empire, as the power of the Senate was weakened, the main power was held by the Principate.

An empire is no more than a unit created by conquest, with the suzerain at the head. The Roman Republic thereby had already assumed the character of an empire in 241 BC when it established its first province, namely Sicily, after the First Punic War. According to historical records, most of the senatorial provinces in ancient Rome were established during the Republican period when the Senate was most powerful. Only after Octavian established his dictatorship did the principate provinces come into existence. In the whole Roman period, there were a total of 45 provinces, which could be classified into senatorial, principate and local provinces, each ruled by an appointed governor.

There were significant differences between the central and provincial systems of the Roman Empire. The governor was very powerful in the provinces, holding almost all executive and legislative powers. During the Republican period and the initial Empire period, Roman governors also held military power in some provinces. For most of the time, the provincial governors had a high degree of autonomy and there was little supervision of their power. This was one reason why Caesar was able to depend on the legions from the provinces to fight his way back to Rome and establish a dictatorship.

The autonomy of the provinces, along with the absence of a numerically dominant ethnic group, and the lack of a unified language, led to a lack of cohesion in the later period of the Roman Empire and difficulties in forming any kind of consensus among the people.

The Roman Empire: reforms and the birth of new nations

Two major reforms were put into effect in the Roman Empire during this period. The first one was the Constitutio Antoniniana, mentioned in the previous article, which sought to grant civil rights to all free people in the empire, so as to increase their sense of responsibility to Rome and establish a social consensus. The second was the Roman emperor Diocletian's attempt to weaken the power of the provinces by increasing their number from 45 to 100, similar to Emperor Wudi of Han's Tui'en Decree in the Han Dynasty.

However, both reforms failed. At the end of the Roman Empire, "barbarian invasions" became more and more frequent, yet many inhabitants of the provinces gave up resistance, with some even cooperating with the invaders. Large numbers of barbarians overwhelming the provinces eventually became the fundamental force bringing forward the disintegration of the Roman Empire.

More importantly, after the fall of the Roman Empire, each province gradually transformed under the influence of powerful barbarians, and then gradually developed into a new nation or state.

The collapse of the Roman Empire was both a great rupture in European civilization and a great integration of nations. The medieval European states were not the direct successors of the Roman Empire but were established by the emerging nations formed through great migrations and integration of different peoples.

Two entities, two fates

In China, after the Qin and Han dynasties, although the Central Plains experienced various uprisings and wars with the ethnic groups on their frontiers, the numerous feudal dynasties established here maintained the governing system inherited from the Han. Thus, the unified system of prefectures and counties never wavered in ancient China.

In contrast, in the Roman Empire, the Roman city-state and the provinces were not a unified system. The Senate and the Principate system on the Italian Peninsula were indeed historic and had a great impact on the political development of later Western countries. However, from the perspective of the entire Roman Empire, the governor/provincial system was very crude, for it completely relied on military forces to suppress or deter uprisings, which did not function well for governing society. Therefore, once the military power of the empire was defeated, the provinces collapsed with it, and the entire empire crumbled into dust.

The author is Han Zhu, a researcher at the China Institute of Fudan University and director of the Shangdao Institute for Social Research.

Liu Xian /Editor    Xue Wensi /Translator

Yang Xinhua /Chief Editor    Ren Qiang /Coordinator

Zhang Ying /Reviewer

Zhang Weiwei /Copyeditor    Tan Yujie /Image Editor

The views don't necessarily reflect those of DeepChina.