Han China and the Gupta/Mauryan Empire were similar in the fact that they both follow and use a monarchy. However, China used strict laws and punishments to keep their subjects under control. The Guptas and the Mauryans did not use strict laws and instead focused on people relying on their morals.
Han China and the Mauryans and Guptas all followed and practiced a monarchy. Han CHina had an emperor. Han China also had the Dynastic Cycle which shows that they had a monarchy because of the fact that the Dynastic Cycle was specifically talking about the Emperor and their dynasty. Another example is the Guptas and the Mauryans also had strong, centralized rulers. Some of them being Chandragupta Maurya and King Ashoka. These rulers fortified peace between and outside of their kingdom and they helped with many public works to help defend…show more content… Punishments involved “rehabilitation”. This did not involve any physical harm or strain and was based on seclusion and meditation. Much like Buddhist beliefs of mediation and knowing oneself. The Mauryans and the Guptas would use fines as a way to punish people for their crimes. This did not involve any physical harm thus proving that ancient Indians did not use strict punishments. The more severe crimes would earn the offender imprisonment; the most physical “harm” being manual labor.
To this day, China and India still follow most of their beliefs in punishments and laws that they did in this current time period. Both follow a monarchy in this time period but enforce it it drastically different ways. China being strict punishments and rewards for even the petty crimes and India following a Buddhist path of nonviolence and peace. Thus showing that while the Empire's may be similar, they are different in the way of how they rule their
