The Roman Empire and the Chinese Han Dynasty may have stood at opposite ends of the Eurasian continent, but they did experience one thing in common — high levels of income inequality.
A team of researchers has demonstrated how large-scale resource extraction and redistribution across vast territories led to steep levels of income inequality on both counts — particularly in Han China.
Not only does this present its own ethical questions, but the study’s authors argue that higher levels of inequality increase the potential for political instability and, ultimately, the collapse of empires.
What is an Empire?
History has seen the rise and fall of countless empires, from Ghengis Khan’s Mongol Empire to the kingdom of Assyria. While they vary significantly in scale and structure, all empires can be characterized by a powerful ruling elite at its center that exerts authority over a series of weaker peripheral states.
Two thousand years ago, the Eurasian continent was dominated by two such empires: the Roman Empire in the west (which covered vast swathes of Europe and the Middle East as well as parts of North Africa) and the Han Dynasty in the east (which incorporated much of what is modern-day China, Vietnam and Korea).
At their apex, each presided over a territory of 1.5 million square miles (four million square kilometers) and governed a population of around 60 to 70 million people.
To find out how imperial structures contributed to levels of inequality, researchers writing in Nature Communications examined historical records from both empires at their peak (ca. 165 C.E. for the Roman Empire and ca. 2 C.E. for the Han Dynasty).
Roman Empire vs Han Dynasty
There are many similarities between the two states, including the existence of extensive administrative and fiscal systems. These enabled officials to collect and redistribute taxes across the territories efficiently (and provided detailed records that are a handy resource for modern historians).
In both cases, much of the revenue collected would be returned to the center. This not only funded the administration and bureaucracy required to run the empire but also provided economic rewards for its elites.
However, there were key differences. Whereas the Romans allied with provincial elites, enabling them to benefit from the empire’s success, the Han rulers attempted to weaken the local elites by forcing powerful families to resettle in or near the capital. This solution resulted in higher levels of wealth in land around the center at the expense of the provincial territories, increasing levels of income inequality throughout the empire.
Read More: The Hierarchy of the 1,200-Year-Long Roman Empire
The Han Dynasty also spent less on its military, possibly because it faced fewer external threats than the Roman Empire. As such, less income was redirected to the outer states, and more was concentrated at its center, where higher-ranking, higher-paid officials tended to reside. This, again, resulted in greater income disparities between the center and outer regions of the empire.
This presents an interesting situation. At first glance, the Han fiscal system appears as if it should be more equal. There was a uniform land tax enforced across the empire and even elements of a progressive tax system. Wealthier merchants, for example, were charged double the poll tax rate and five times the property rate of a free peasant. However, in reality, it resulted in significantly higher rates of income inequality between the central and periphery regions of the empire.
The Han Dynasty also saw greater rates of income inequality within society. According to the study, the richest one percent earned 26 percent of the total income, and the poorest 50 percent received just 24 percent. In contrast, the richest one percent of Romans earned 19 percent of the total income, while the poorest 50 percent received 25 percent.
What Does this Mean for Us?
Do these findings have any modern-day implications? The researchers say their study “appears to empirically match a potential for political instability and social unrest growing with overall inequality levels”, pointing to the fact that the Han Dynasty experienced two decades of civil war following the period studied. In other words, the greater the income inequality, the greater the potential for political instability.
"The main lesson for today, in my view, is that high economic inequality tends to be associated with high political instability and social unrest,” says Guido Alfani, who was involved in the study and is a Professor at Bocconi University.
“In our analysis, this fate befell the Han Empire, which shortly after 2 C.E. (the year to which our inequality estimates for China relate) was disrupted by almost two decades of rebellion and civil war, leading to a severe dynastic crisis.”
Read More: What Was the Silk Road and What Happened to It?
Article Sources
Our writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:
Nature Communications. A comparison of income inequality in the Roman and Chinese Han empires
Rosie is a freelance writer living in London. She has covered science and health topics for publications, including IFLScience, Newsweek, and Health.
