Gender Inequality In Ancient China

Since its beginning, mankind has been engaged in a desperate struggle for power. In attempts to secure this power, many leaders and groups worked toward forming empires and societies. While few ultimately accomplished this to any degree of significance, some of these endeavors resulted in the paragons of today’s most accomplished organizations. While a number of similarities likely accounted for the overall prosperity, it can be argued that successful communities have always shared a specific common factor: an established set of social norms or rules to create a unified cohesion among its citizens. Though these expectations or obligations inevitably varied, they nevertheless existed and underpinned the fragile nature of society. Among those

While social class served as the simplest and most obvious determining factor of the echelons, the laws of the Han’s system further distinguished roles by profession as well as by gender (both often correlating with one’s societal standing regardless). Consequent to the patriarchal ideology, the Han upper-class comprised primarily of male scholars, classically educated in Confucian teachings. As a result, men had authority over women and children; despite this, some women and children, usually within gentry families, were encouraged and afforded opportunities to receive education and thus, higher status. The wealthy Han lived lavish lifestyles, enjoying private entertainment, fine dining, and quality clothing that the large majority of commoners could never imagine. In contrast to the disconnect between the Han’s social elite and nobility from the bourgeois and peasants, the Roman system, while still maintaining the distinction, tilted towards a degree of equality amongst all in a relationship compared to patronage: “[People] of ...high social status acted as patrons… supporting “clients” from the lower classes...this informal social code raised expectations that the wealthy would be civic benefactors.” Though official law stated otherwise, this “informal social code,” resulted in an opportunistic way of life in

The Chinese and the Romans approached the problem of both supporting and funding public works and military enlargement in surprisingly similar manners. Both groups imposed stringent taxes based on various factors of one’s profession, to be paid upon coming of age. Payment of taxes served as a basic civil duty in both empires. Furthermore, in order to enforce taxation and other mandated or expected obligations, both stood firmly by harsh sanctions in which, “Minor infractions of duty were punishable by death” The fear of punishment ultimately resulted in an ever-increasing source of revenue with which to control the state and maintain the domain. To further support the security and welfare of the empire, both ends of Eurasia believed in the extensive utilization of a strong army. To create these armies, soldiers were (initially) sourced in vast amounts by the conscription of able-bodied men on a yearly basis. The strength of each army provided the driving force in their mass territorial expansion and control over the newly claimed lands. This pattern of conscripting men to fight for the country provided an adequate force for the Chinese, but the Romans eventually realized that their armies could become even more powerful with soldiers of true fidelity. Over the course of many years, the Roman